Periodically Justin Smith reviews the murder of LaVoy Finicum
by the FBI (taking the lead). Finicum’s death resulted from rancher/farmer
protests of intruding on their livelihood in relation to taking of their animal
stock. Can you say intrusive-abusive fees and land restrictions in the name of
eco-Marxists and greedy corporations?
The ironic union is motivated by protecting useless species
and/or mining of metal ores often times enriching American Leftists selling out
to foreign entities that offers risk rather than benefit to Americans.
The upset rancher/farmer often will cite U.S. Constitution Article I, Section 8, Clause 17
while the Leftist scoffs at the legal reasoning notably due unchallenged
Congressional legislation and Judicial Activism. YET the rancher/farmer stand
looks at the Constitution’s temporary stipulations of Federal control which
SHOULD enable an individual State to reclaim Federally controlled land.
This is yet another dot connecting many Left-Right issues if
connected to completion probably end in Civil War for a resolution.
Blog Editor: Rather than
capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post
and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship
tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false
accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat
censorship by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you
belong to.
************************
A Martyr in Defense of Liberty
LaVoy Finicum's Journey and His Destiny
By Justin O. Smith
Sent 1/11/2020 2:16 AM
Raised in the northwestern corner of Arizona Navajo
territory, Robert LaVoy Finicum largely came to manhood in and around the
sprawling area of Fredonia and Colorado City, Arizona, just off State Route
389, and Hildale, Utah, before his fateful death, his murder
by law enforcement, near Burns, Oregon on January 26th 2016,
just one day before his 55th birthday. His name is a hallowed one in the annals
of the Patriot movement and the minds of
most American Patriots, as a man who was willing to fight for those ideas of
freedom and liberty and the Founding principles of America.
LaVoy led a small band of protesters, including Cliven
Bundy's sons, Ryan and Ammon, American Patriots who understood that the federal
government and the Bureau
of Land Management (BLM) were consistently and
constantly acquiring or simply taking water and grazing rights and land unconstitutionally,
from farmers and ranchers across America. These men and women were standing
firm for property rights under Our Bill of Rights, when they occupied the Malheur
National Wildlife Refuge on January 2nd 2016 and began a standoff with the FBI
and other law enforcement agencies, that lasted forty-one days.
[Blog Editor: In using various search engines I was disappointed
that most links turned were quite negative toward ranchers and farmers being
weary of the Federal government utilizing land control to manage the increasingly
rare individual rural land owner’s decisions of their own ranch or farm. The
perspectives were Left-Wing by far in the majority. The search engines emphasized
an element of White Supremacism and racism among ranchers and farmers really
more angry about imposed land limitations than politics. Most Western ranchers
and farmers are Caucasians so it’s a bit moronic to call them White Supremacists.
HOWEVER when White Supremacist organizations seemingly appear to offer support to
generational ranch/farm operations, WHO do you think these ranchers and farmers
will gravitate toward? AT ANY RATE who are two perspectives of the Malheur
Occupation that too me appear Leftist yet with some sympathy toward rancher/farmer
plights. The perspective was written prior to Bundy Judicial exonerations and
the Hammond pardons:
LaVoy and anyone else with a proper understanding of
America's Founding understood that the land is a gift of God to man to be
individually commanded and cultivated to suit his purposes, and government
officials do not have any right to interfere with this unalienable God-given
right. In line with this same logic, Article I, Section
8, Clause 17
of the Constitution clearly states that land within the boundaries of a state
may only be acquired by the national government, if it has the consent of the
state legislature; and then, it can only acquire it for the placement of
military forts, arsenals, dock yards and other needful buildings. This
procedure was created to ensure that the national government could not simply
grab land and use the land as a means to coerce the states and people to do
their bidding and to expand its power past the limitations of the Constitution.
And, this same principle applies to water and grazing rights, especially those
handed down to pioneers' descendants from territorial grants preceding
statehood.
It was from this point of view that LaVoy started his
journey towards his destiny, in June 2015, as he wrote the following in two separate letters to the BLM,
three days apart that read, in part: "At this time I feel compelled to
stand (up for) the Constitution of our land and in doing so please do not feel
I am attacking your character. This is not about cows and grass, access or
resources, this is about freedom and defending our Constitution in its original
intent ... I am severing my association with the BLM."
During this same time frame, LaVoy had expressed his
displeasure over ranchers steadily being pushed out of grazing lands like the
Grand Canyon-Pashant [Blog Editor: perhaps Parashant or Pesant?] and BLM
tactics, after they called him and told him to remove 24 head of his cattle
grazing on "BLM land", on the Arizona Strip. LaVoy replied that he
was "not asking permission".
After the BLM drained one of his water storage tanks to
fight a grass fire, he exclaimed: "[The water is] mine. It's for my cows.
I need it. Quit stealing." He later took to Youtube where he asked,
"You gonna come in there like You did with my friend, Clive?" He
concluded: "Well, I'm telling you, leave me alone. Leave me alone, leave
Cliven alone."
This set the stage for LaVoy's trip to Harney County, Oregon
to join Ammon and Ryan Bundy in the Malheur Refuge Occupation, after seeing so
many other small ranchers treated unfairly by the BLM, with those truths
previously mentioned solidified after standing alongside Cliven Bundy, during
his standoff with the BLM. He and all the others were truly making a stand
against the overreach of the federal government, and in the process, they hoped
to get all America thinking more about liberty.
Just as our Federalist Founders didn't want an all-powerful
federal government, so too the people, who still hold the ideas espoused by
LaVoy and others, such as Cliven Bundy, are simply wary and opposed to any
heavy concentration of power in the hands of the federal government, since they
have already witnessed, too often first hand, the manner that power is so
easily abused, especially through the BLM. However, neither do they see
government as evil, or even a necessary evil.
Far from the "white supremacists" and
"domestic terrorists" that yellow journalists, such as Kevin
Sullivan, and the establishment propaganda press, like the Washington Post,
attempted to portray them as being, these men and women were simply strong
advocates for a responsible, limited government that favored local solutions
and a federalist system inhibiting the centralization of all government into
the hands of the few, adhering to the full and proper use of the checks and
balances and good government practices set forth in the Constitution.
Noted by B.J. Soper, head of the Pacific Patriots Network, in 2016,
and by many patriots previous to and after him [ZeroHedge]: "We've let the
government step over the line and rule us, and that was never the intent of
this country." And I would add, it was certainly never the intent of our
nation's Founders.
And given the dangerous assaults and violence exhibited by
extremists in the protests of Black Lives Matter [the other BLM] and Occupy Wall Street, there isn't any
justification for the actions of law enforcement against LaVoy and his fellow
protesters, who were protesting peacefully, even if they had "taken"
Malheur. People were initially able to come and go freely, until the protesters
started blocking entrance from fear of federal government infiltration aimed at
arresting and removing them, before they achieved their goals. LaVoy certainly
wasn't so dangerous or violent a man that he had to be so sorely mistreated and
ultimately executed.
Whether he was armed or not is irrelevant. We regularly see
many militiamen at peaceful protests all over America, both socialists and
conservatives, going armed with long guns and pistols. Going armed at a
protest, as is Constitutionally protected from many legal perspectives, isn't a
death warrant, or at least it shouldn't be. Our Constitution doesn't state that
anyone must allow themselves to be abused by government agents, or anyone else,
and it doesn't prevent any American from engaging in a proper and lawful act of
self-defense, especially if one is defending themselves against government
tyranny.
Passenger Shawna Cox captured the entire miserable and
dastardly event on her cell phone, and I have watched the video with sound,
that captured the moment of LaVoy's death, so many numerous times, often
choking back my own angry tears, to think that people sworn to protect and
defend the Constitution could so casually ignore it in this or any case; and,
each time, I can only conclude this was a planned execution.
From the first roadblock stop and the shot that hit LaVoy's
driver side mirror to the second roadblock, it becomes well and beyond apparent
that this was a planned execution. The bullets were flying at LaVoy's vehicle
before he could even come to a complete stop on the slippery snow-covered road,
as the video does show, in fact, a bullet piercing the truck ceiling; and, as
he exited the vehicle with hands raised, he was immediately hit in the side by
a round, that caused him to flinch to that side -- offering the assassins their
excuse "he was reaching for a gun" -- and multiple rounds then hit
him and his life was ended.
Several FBI agents and Oregon Highway Patrol fired on LaVoy,
but it was Casey Codding, of the Oregon Highway Patrol, who fired on the
vehicle before it ever stopped. FBI agent Joseph Astarita fired the first shot
after LaVoy jumped from the vehicle, to divert law enforcement's attention away
from his friends, and in the course of the execution, Codding shot LaVoy in the
back twice, just like a coward, even though LaVoy was not brandishing a firearm
or any other weapon -- even though they knew that LaVoy was an innocent,
peaceful rancher without any criminal history who had told them he was on his
way to a meeting with the Sheriff of Grant County -- even though they knew he
had a large family of eleven children and was a good man who had never
threatened anyone.
Most good police officers go their entire career without
ever having to kill anyone. Codding has killed three people, including a
teenager, "in the line of duty". He's also one of LaVoy's murderers.
Whatever happened to "protect and serve"? Who has
police forces across the country so indoctrinated and so intensely concerned to
the point they see ranchers and family men as the greatest enemy to their
country?
There wasn't even one attempt to peacefully negotiate with
the Malheur group and LaVoy Finicum, even though all LaVoy did at the refuge
was speak to authorities in a non-threatening manner. It should deeply trouble
all Americans that law enforcement had so little conscience and lack of
reservation, they could easily shoot LaVoy with his hands raised; equally
troubling, they didn't even check him for a pulse, until they had walked around
his body for fifteen minutes, as they placed their lack of respect for human
life on full display before the American people.
Far too many law enforcement don't even understand what it
really means to defend the Constitution and freedom, as they set about
destroying the freedoms of the American people in an out-of-control display of
power at the behest of mayors and governors using them to acquire greater
influence and power, i.e. as we currently see unfolding in Virginia via
Governor Northam and the Democrat majority in the Virginia legislature
regarding proposed gun control measures. Wicked "leaders" could not
so subvert our freedoms without willing murderers like Casey Codding.
CASEY CODDING another
Finicum shooter
Today, all Americans must face the certain fact that our
federal government is out-of-control and corrupt, nearly beyond the point of
salvation. It will kill its own citizens if we try to live too freely, or so it
does seem, of late. Who can ever remove the image from their mind, of Vicky Weaver being shot through the head, as she held her baby
in her arms in the doorway of her husband's cabin on Ruby Ridge? An
innocent American shot dead by FBI sniper, Lon Horiuchi,
on August 21st 1992; look at Waco, Texas in 1993 and the
overreaction of the ATF; one incident after another, until the standoff at
Cliven Bundy's ranch, when armed patriots came to his defense and said "No
More".
What has happened to this America I love so well, that one
can barely distinguish between the Bad Guys and the Good Guys, in the ranks of
those charged to protect and defend society? This case and the recent soft coup
against the President indicate a great evil courses through their ranks today.
Throughout the history of the FBI, how many times has anyone
in America seen any rancher draw his firearm on an FBI agent, or any other law
enforcement agent? These ranchers aren't common low-down thugs. They are fine
Americans, the salt of the earth.
Has there ever been an FBI agent who defended or aided or
stood alongside a rancher, because it was the right thing to do and it kept
with their oath to defend the Constitutional rights of those in their care? Has
any FBI agent ever stepped outside his role as a government pawn protecting
special interests, to actually protect the people he was supposedly hired to
serve and protect?
LaVoy had stated, time and again, a desire to make sure that
the standoff ended peacefully, and up until the day of the ambush, there wasn't
any reason to believe that it wouldn't, since LaVoy had been in constant
contact with Sheriff Glenn Palmer, who was quite sympathetic to the cowboy's
cause. These men weren't "anti-government"; they were anti-tyranny.
LaVoy would be alive and well at home, with his family today, acquitted of all
wrong-doing, just as many other defendants associated with the standoff have
been, if the FBI and the Oregon Highway Patrol had not escalated the situation.
Ironically, LaVoy wrote a book entitled “Only By Blood and Suffering”,
originally published in 2015, that foreshadowed his own death. The protagonist,
a cowboy, dies in a shootout with the federal government, just as LaVoy finally
did.
Real American patriots, such as Robert LaVoy Finicum, are
far and few between these days, especially in the ranks of our elected
officials, since so many so-called conservatives claim to stand for the
Constitution against the federal government's overreach, as they stand by
silent and meek, in the wake of its insistent and continuous assaults against
'We the People' and our rights to life, liberty, property and freedom from the
restrictions of arbitrary force. The faux conservatives are far too willing to
allow federal power grabs to go unopposed, as a large, meddlesome, intrusive
state and its progressive operated institutions undermine our private economy,
economic liberty and the freedom to own property and allocate our own
resources, enervating the country's civic character; but LaVoy Finicum was willing
to go all the way, sacrificing himself and giving his life, in his fight
against the Bureau of Land Management, in order to preserve those values that
were established centuries ago that respect our God-given rights.
Twenty-one short months of LaVoy's life passed, between the
time he showed up alone at the Bundy Ranch in 2014 and the moment he died a
leader of the Malheur occupation in 2016. He died as he had lived, trying to
make a difference and protecting the ideas and people he loved; he died a
martyr in defense of freedom and liberty.
By Justin O. Smith
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Blog Editor: Rather than
capitulate to Facebook censorship by abandoning the platform, I choose to post
and share until the Leftist censors ban me. Recently, the Facebook censorship
tactic I’ve experienced is a couple of Group shares then jailed under the false
accusation of posting too fast. So I ask those that read this, to combat censorship
by sharing blog and Facebook posts with your friends or Groups you belong to.
______________________
Edited by John R. Houk
Text embraced by brackets and
source links are by the Editor.
This post is somewhat a Part II to Tony Newbill’s defense of Ranchers and
Farmers as an explanation or reason that these land owners are
upset with Government appropriation of land that has been in the traditional
usage in the public domain or even stolen from private ownership.
Understanding what we are up against by reading the First Link
PLAYING OUTSIDE THE RULES. Read the back and forth debate between Walley and
Suckling … When you get done reading this back and forth, I would say that the
ego of environmentalism has become more important than the realities of what
sustainability means and the courts need to be asked to consider this line of
thought when they are deciding on the use of resources going forward here!!!!!!
Hundreds, if not thousands, of
public land ranchers, loggers and miners have had their livelihoods destroyed
by the ultra-effective strategies of the Southwest Center for Biological
Diversity (SWC). They move like a band of guerrilla insurgents in their battle
for public lands. The old, dogmatic environmental groups like the Sierra Club
and the Audubon Society have became so bureaucratic and public opinion driven,
that they have become slow and cumbersome in their efforts. SWC moves rapidly
because decision making is concentrated in the activists who founded the group,
and they appear not to give a damn about public opinion or the lives of people
affected.
…
Suckling describes his team as
"incredibly driven and passionate about the work we do. We are creative
and manic. We have not played by the general 'rules' of activism.
Unpredictability, speed and creative action has made it very hard for
extractive industries and the government to anticipate or respond to us. By
keeping everyone, including ourselves, continually moving in new directions, we
have been able to destabilize the status quo of subsidized logging, grazing,
mining and urban sprawl.... Many groups are hampered by the fear of upsetting
their congressional connections, their funders, the media, etc. While we feel
the pull of such things, we daily remind ourselves that social change comes
with social tension and that our job is to create that dynamic tension,
regardless of the pressure of back-down or compromise."
Their "manic" guerrilla
tactics have been efficient, damn efficient. The group's active litigation record-84
lawsuits in five years-on everything from waterways to woodlands to dams has
attained national attention. The group says it has won 77 percent of final
judgments. Suckling declares their success is built on what he describes as the
two strongest forces of the environmental movement: science and law.
"The law says that the best
possible science is to be used in managing our public lands," he says,
"so we conduct our own scientific research to show that's not happening,
then we litigate. It's an incredible amount of work, but with an honest judge
you can shut down a billion-dollar development in a heartbeat."
…
Kieran's using "The
force of the courts," has created untold suffering and distress for many
westerners.
The effects of courtroom and
backroom bargaining by the SWC deeply trouble New Mexico rancher, Hugh
McKinney. "What knocked me off my lease was a backroom agreement between
the Forest Service and SWC [what some call The Tucson Back-Alley Agreement]
that excluded ranchers. The judge did not approve it; he would not sign it. The
agreement affects you to the point that's all you talk about with friends and
neighbors. It bothered me to the point that I have no spirit, no energy to plan
for a future. They took my allotment with lies and I have no recourse to
correct those lies. We were forced off our land, but the Forest Service called
it volunteering to quit."
…
I asked Kieran's old professor,
Pax, a hard question during the telephone interview. "What do you think of
the pain, human suffering, the dismantling of rural communities created by
Kieran's actions?"
The professor's indifferent answer
was a revelation that brought Suckling's environmental philosophy back to its
seed. "He doesn't see any other way to proceed in his work without
disruption like that! He doesn't do it for the sake of disruption, but he is
not going to stop his work simply because people are uncomfortable with
it!"
I had asked Kieran similar
questions in our Tucson meeting.
Walley: "What about those people you are putting off the land
and out of work? What is your ethic and social responsibility to those
humans?"
Suckling
answered slowly and cautiously, choosing each word with care and
sidestepping the question: "Our government and its corporate sponsors have
created a system of subsidies that has to be abolished. They turned the lands
into a commodity. We have to get public land users off this welfare system. It
is not a simple thing to break those chains."
Walley: "But what about those people who are suffering during
this change?"
Suckling: "As I say, it is not a simple thing. We have entire
communities that have grown up in this system of land-based government
subsides. To change that is not a painless thing."
Walley: "You, are creating rural refugees!"
Kieran's ego finally shows, his
speech picks up speed and emphasis: "It's more than rural. I'm dealing
with the Grand Canyon, Hoover Dam and Los Angeles. Thirteen million people are
used to getting their water this way, I say that's great, but we are going to
show them a different way to do it!"
Walley: "You are forcing change on society and you are aware
of it?"
Suckling: "Yeah! Isn't that what an activist is! What do you
think an activist is? We change society!"
Walley: "Can't you do this in a humane and gentle way?"
Suckling: "It is sad, but I don't hear you put that in a
direct relationship to the effect on the land. I hear you talk about the pain
of the people but I don't see you match that up with the pain of the
species."
Walley (dumbfounded): "What?"
Suckling: "A loach minnow is more important, than say, Betty
and Jim's ranch-a thousand times more important. I'm not against ranching, it
is a job. My concern is the impact on the land."
Walley: "Ranchers across America and Australia are going to
read this article Kieran. What would you say to them?"
Suckling: "The logging industry denied for years that logging
damaged the land. Because they refused to acknowledge problems or change their operations,
the came under tremendous public pressure, which led to a massive
collapse of the industry on public lands. Thus far, the ranching industry is
heading down the same path. Its obstacles will be far greater: many more
species are threatened by grazing than by logging, the public is much more
aware of environmental damage today than a decade ago, and activists are
bringing skills and organizing abilities to the overgrazing issue which have
been honed in the logging battles. Ranchers should take a long hard look at
what happened with the logging industry. They should also take a long hard look
at the reality of overgrazing on public lands. If the industry does not
acknowledge and change, it won't exist on public land two decades from now.
Ultimately it will be ranchers, not environmentalists, who determine whether
public lands grazing will continue."
Walley: "Do you see a middle-ground with the ranching
industry? Compromise? If so, what are the parameters you could work
within?"
Suckling: "I sincerely believe that cattle ranching has done
more damage to public lands in the Southwest than logging, mining, urban
sprawl, or any other extractive use. While it is easy to see the scars of
logging and sprawl, the denuding of groundcover, erosion of soils, and
destruction of riparian vegetation is far more widespread. Numerous scientific
studies confirm that species endangerment in the Southwest is more closely
connected to grazing than any other single event. That said, I also have no
personal dislike of cattle grazing. If cattle can be run on public lands and
not destroy the environment, that's fine with me, but it is up to the ranching
industry to change its practices and demonstrate public lands can be
economically grazed without damaging the land. That is the forum of
compromise. We have worked out a few projects with loggers because it has
been demonstrated that small trees in thickets can be removed while benefiting
the environment. The ranching industry needs to demonstrate the same. Happy talk
about 'sustainability' is just talk. Extrapolations from private lands in
different ecosystems to public lands are unconvincing. The parameters, then,
have to take the form of demonstration."
…… And to point out a conception of Animal Racism with the
way these Environmentalists are using Government laws to “Select Certain Species
for Salvation over Others” and compare that to the concept of Human extinction
under what is becoming obvious as an effort to engineer a die-off of humanity
by locking up all the resources that humanity survives on. When do we see these
same Environmentalists begin to Select themselves as the Threatened Species
that needs a Law to protect their Existence????
What stands out as a Possible solution to bring balance back
to what these Radicals are doing to human existence? Use the same tactics of
lawsuits to sustain resources for humans that they have used for the species
they have used as tools to lock up the resources away from Human access for
Life!!!!! The Courts have NEVER been put in a situation to Decide if Human Life
is More important than Animal Species. If Courts rule this way as far as making
resources the topic of how to preserve Renewable usage for Human Life so that Human
Life can then be what sustains Animal Life…. And the path Environmentalism is
on will leave NO ONE Human Left to take care of the habitat that takes care of
the Animal species. The Courts need to rule on this aspect of this effect going
forward, starting with the Irrigation Water Lawsuit here in Central Oregon!!!!!!!!
Environmentalists and irrigators
have differing opinions on how a court order being sought for changes in
Deschutes River flows upstream of Bend would affect farms, ranches and other
water users.
The Center for Biological Diversity
and WaterWatch of Oregon filed for a preliminary injunction last week,
requesting the Bureau of Reclamation and three irrigation districts in Central
Oregon manage the river’s water differently. The irrigation districts named in
the filing are the Central Oregon, North Unit and Tumalo.
The problem, says Noah Greenwald,
endangered species director for the Center for Biological Diversity, is this
leaves the Oregon spotted frog and other river animals with little water. He
said the group, which is based in Arizona and has an office in Portland, wants
to find a way for the amphibians and irrigators to coexist.
…
Currently the bureau keeps
wintertime flows in the Deschutes River reduced in order to fill upstream
reservoirs. Summertime flows are then higher to supply farmers, ranchers and
other water users.
…
So if the court orders a change in
how the Deschutes River is managed this spring, people who draw water from the
district may face “abrupt and severe restrictions,” according to a news release
last week from the Deschutes Basin Board of Control. The group represents eight
irrigation districts.
… READ
ENTIRETY(Frog lawsuit could change Deschutes River
flows: Environmental groups, irrigators have differing views on court case; ByDylan
J. Darling; The Bulletin; 2/14/16 12:01AM – updated 2/16/16 11:27AM)
The Opening arguments on the 22nd regarding our [Tony Newbill is from Oregon] Irrigation
water lawsuit with Suckling needs to hear this concept. We need to ask the
courts to consider the sustainability of habitat for animal species if the
trend of creating an environment that humans go extinct is not balanced out
here before it’s too late. The crisis of human extinction is met with the Chaos
of those events unfolding, because if we get to this kind of a stage in food
production the chaos will override the efforts to keep habitat sustained!!!!
I would say that the ego of environmentalism has become more
important than the realities of what sustainability means and the courts need
to be asked to consider this line of thought when they are deciding on the use
of resources going forward here!!!!!!
And here is more on how we can see the Egotism that’s gone
array from the reality that the Courts should not be influenced with:
[Blog Editor: The link above is a short backgrounder of
Kieran Suckling. The last paragraph provides an interesting micro-profile of
Suckling:]
The New Yorker has
dubbed Suckling’s organization, the Center for Biological Diversity, “the most
important radical environmental group in the country” and Suckling a
“trickster, philosopher, publicity hound, master strategist, and unapologetic
pain in the ass.” The LA Weekly calls the Center “pound for
pound, dollar for dollar, the most effective conservation organization in the
country,” and says of Suckling: “Rimbaud reinvented poetry. Kierán Suckling
would do the same with environmentalism.” (Animal Law Conference: Kierán Suckling; Lewis and Clark Law School)
The New Yorker has
dubbed Suckling’s organization, the Center for Biological Diversity, “the most important radical environmental
group in the country” and Suckling a “trickster,
philosopher, publicity hound, master strategist, and unapologetic pain in the
ass.” The LA Weekly calls the
Center “pound for pound, dollar for
dollar, the most effective conservation organization in the country,” and
says of Suckling: “Rimbaud reinvented poetry.
Kierán Suckling would do the same with environmentalism.”
The climate crisis is deepening,
rare plants and animals are vanishing at an accelerating clip, and politicians
— well supported by the polluter class — are freshly emboldened to chip away at
laws that protect our water, air, environment and wildlife.
To be blunt, when it came to
tackling the most important environmental issues of our age, President Obama’s
first term was a disappointment. He has a chance to salvage his legacy (and
ours) in his second term. Here are the five places to start:
1. Address climate change and ocean acidification. …
...
2. Stem the extinction crisis. …
…
3. Keep politics out of the
Endangered Species Act and other vital environmental laws. …
…
4. Safeguard our public lands,
wild places and the Arctic. …
…
5. Embrace a newer, cleaner
energy. …
It’s time to reinvent our energy
future by focusing on renewable sources of energy, including solar, geothermal
and wind. Yes, these come with complications, and we’ve got to be smart about
how we make the shift, but it can and must be done. There’s a smarter, saner
way to move ahead, and that path is open to us. All we need now is the courage
and political will to step onto it. (Mr.
President: 5 Ways to Salvage Your Environmental Legacy (and Our Future)); By Kieran Suckling;
HuffPost Green; 11/7/12 01:12 am ET –
updated 1/6/13)
Suckling points out that he wants more of the Federal Lands
Locked up and Obama has already locked up 265 million acres so the courts need
to be asked HOW MUCH More before we cause a Major Disruption in Food Supplies
Worldwide that causes People to become Chaotic and that Chaos interrupts the
sustaining of Habitat????
Obama’s designations total 265 million acres, and he isn’t
done yet:
As the presidential election
heats up, ask yourself which candidate will repeal WOTUS, get control of the
EPA and allow ranchers to get back to work without being held back by unfair
regulations.
Don’t hold your breath for any of them to “repeal WOTUS” etc. There is
not a dime’s worth of difference in any of them. They are all under the
influence of radical environmentalism (because it is PC and being PC is
necessary to get elected).
But, at least it is encouraging to see a main-stream rag like Beef
Magazine is finally beginning to pay attention to what is going on in the
(about to get really) Wild West. — jtl, 419
I don’t know about you, but in my
opinion, the 2016 presidential election can’t come soon enough.
For the 22nd time during his nearly
eight years in office, President Obama has taken advantage of the Antiquities
Act of 1906, locking up millions of acres of land in the western states.
Obama’s designations total 265
million acres, and his most recent designation of the Sand to Snow National
Monument, Mojave Trails National Monument and Castle Mountains National
Monument totals 1.8 million acres.
[Blog Editor:
The link summary is above in this post.]
So is he willing to cause people to become Chaotic????? Did
his actions cause people like Hammonds, Bundys and Finicum to act out the ways
in which they did or were made to be seen as such???????
4. [Blog Editor: This looks like a quote
but I’m not sure where Newbill found it.] Safeguard our public lands, wild
places and the Arctic. There are nearly 650 million acres of federal land in
the United States.
But not all of those 650 acres of Federal Lands is Grazing
production for food, as this link points out. So we need to start considering
how much of an Impact has Environmentalist Land Grabs affected our sustainable
food supplies, because we don’t know to what extent these same NGOs have
affected other food producing areas around the world too????
Rangelands are distinguished
from pasture lands because they
grow primarily native vegetation, rather than plants established by humans.
Rangelands are also managed principally with practices such as managed
livestock grazing and prescribed fire rather than more intensive agricultural
practices of seeding, irrigation, and the use of fertilizers.
…
Fire is also an important regulator
of range vegetation, whether set by humans or resulting from lightning. Fires
tend to reduce the abundance of woody plants and promote herbaceous plants
including grasses, forbs, and grass-like plants. The suppression or reduction
of periodic wildfires from desert shrublands, savannas, or woodlands frequently
invites the dominance of trees and shrubs to the near exclusion of grasses and
forbs.[1]
… READ ENTIRETY
(Rangeland; Wikipedia; page last modified 2/24/16 22:02)
And don’t forget the Dead Harvest Video, it’s a glowing
example of yet more reasons to consider if we are reaching a food supply crisis:
[Blog Editor:The above link begins with a Paul Gilding
2-minute CNN video I’m not embedding about Enviro-Marxist spiel in forcing
people to take care of the environment for the good of planet, then comes the
CNN article.]
For 50 years the environmental
movement has unsuccessfully argued that we should save the planet for moral
reasons, that there were more important things than money. Ironically, it now
seems it will be money -- through the economic impact of climate change and
resource constraint -- that will motivate the sweeping changes necessary to
avert catastrophe.
…
The eminent scientists of the
Global Footprint Network, for example, calculate that we need about 1.5 Earths
to sustain this economy. In other words, to keep operating at our
current level, we need 50% more Earth than we've got.
…
… Chinese Environment Minister Zhou
Shengxian said last year, "The depletion, deterioration and exhaustion of
resources and the worsening ecological environment have become bottlenecks and
grave impediments to (our) economic and social development." If I had said
that in the '90s, when I was the global head of Greenpeace, it would have been
dismissed as doom-and-gloom extremism!
…
As a result, the crisis will be
big, it will be soon, and it will be economic, not environmental. The fact is
the planet will take further bludgeoning, further depleting its capital, but
the economy cannot -- so we'll respond not because the environment is under
great threat, but because the science and economics shows that something far
more important to us is jeopardized -- economic growth.
…
So when this crisis hits, will we
respond or will we simply slide into collapse? Crisis elicits a powerful human
response, whether it be personal health, natural disaster, corporate crisis or
national threat. Previously immovable barriers to change quickly disappear.
In this case, the crisis will be
global and will manifest as the end of economic growth, thereby striking at the
very heart of our model of human progress. While that will make the task of
ending denial harder, it also means what's at risk is, quite simply, everything
we hold to be important. The last time this happened was World War II, and our
response to that is illustrative of both the denial and delay process and the
likely form our response to this crisis will take.
…
Do you find this hard to imagine
today? Then try to imagine the alternative -- that in a collapsing global
economy and society we will stand by and simply watch the slide. There is no
precedent in modern history on which to base that conclusion and plenty of
evidence for the alternative. Humanity may be slow, but we are not stupid. Get
ready for the great disruption. … You
can READ
ENTIRETY, but trust me it’s propaganda to get the normal person living
a life to accept harsh State control of government, production, population and
our lives. (The Earth is full; By Paul Gilding; CNN; 4/8/12 Updated 9:39 AM ET)
I have more examples of these kinds of things, but hey do we
know what we are really up against here????
Tony Newbill examines the Land Grab environment that the
American Left is imposing on Western ranchers, farmers, the job creating oil
industry and so on. A lot of this goes to explain the reasons ranchers such as
the Bundys, Hammonds, Finicums and more have begun to confront the government
on Land Grab policies. Some of the underlying motives of the Left can be seen
in the UN Agenda 21.
More on why we are
where we are with Tyranny Today in America
By Tony Newbill
3/15/2016 9:39 AM
More on where the ideology comes from for a Totalitarian
system which is tearing down the Liberty of the USA that those like Lavoy and
Ammon have acted out against. When the truth is not Transparent Confused people
is the result and that is why we see Conflict happen!!!!
For the last two weeks or so, I’ve
been going back into the C-Span Archives to watch programs concerning the
President’s Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD) that was created by
Executive Order 12852 in 1993. I was doing that as a part of my
research on the Bureau of Land Management related to the Bundy Family, the
Hammond Family, the Yantis Family and countless other ranching families that
the federal government declared war on.
Ammon Bundy and the Malheur
Occupiers called attention to the BLM’s war on ranchers and for that I, as an
American citizen am grateful because the issues they exposed are just the tip
of the iceberg. They have done a great service for this nation that
goes well beyond the war on ranchers.
The second meeting of the
PCSD was held on October 18, 1993. The meeting was
hosted by the Department of Commerce. Ron Brown was the Secretary of
Commerce. He was the first speaker at the meeting.
This is a video clip of Commerce
Secretary Ron Brown speaking at the second meeting of the President's Council
on Sustainable Development in 1993.
In four minutes, Ron Brown laid
at the strategy for what was a coup d’etat on the American government and the
establishment of a system to facilitate the development of a global commercial
crime syndicate. Here are the main points from Ron Brown’s … READ THE
REST (Government Overthrow of the People;
By Vicky Davis; TVOI News; 3/7/16)
More on where the ideology comes from for a Totalitarian
system
Here is a long History of Healthcare reform and what that
reform in the minds of our Bureaucracy looks like. During the time Obamacare was being championed
for approval Jonathan was in and out of the Whitehouse many times:
ObamaCare architect, Jonathan
Gruber has been removed from the Massachusetts Health Connector Board after
calling the American people stupid.
The MIT economist professor was
involved in the construction of ObamaCare visiting the White House on several
occasions and has also made several controversial statements linking abortion
to eugenics, the reduction of welfare, crime, and black births.
A look at the White House visitor logs reveals
that Gruber was a regular at the Obama White House.
While apologizing for his insulting
statements to the American people Gruber was also grilled on controversial
eugenics like statementshe
made on abortion, referring to the poor as “marginal children” and calling for
“positive selection.”
Agenda 21 is a product of the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, and it is the means
by which Americans may soon be saddled with lower living standards. Agenda 21
is implementing "soft law" through ICLEI, which amounts to bribes and
regulations imposed by state and local governments.
By Tom Eddlem - Liberty News Network Correspondent.
While we were all distracted with
Weiner's weiner, President Obama signed yet another Executive Order, this one
to take control of all Rural Lands across the heartland. If you live outside
the city, look out the Feds are coming. To help you of course.
Rep. Louie Gohmert (TX-01), who is
also Chairman on House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations, appeared on C-SPAN, Washington Journal and talked to Peter Slen
about the situation in Oregon involving federal lands. He displayed maps on the
program depicting issues that private land owners may face when the government
possesses such a significant percentage of land within a state.
The same thing talked about here over water rights is what
happened to Hammonds in Burns:
For those wishing a greater
understanding of the issues facing property owners in the West, Ramona Hage
gives a succinct explanation based on her years as the daughter of one of
America's foremost ranchers. Wayne Hage purchased his family's ranch in 1978
and the struggle with the BLM and other federal agencies, including the Forest
Service, started soon thereafter (see his last interview before he passed away
here: https://youtu.be/f4hKiEnQdwU).
The family has fought for their private property rights in court for over
thirty years. (Posted courtesy of the National Press Club.) Further information
is available at "sustainingamerica.com"
THIS is a Very Important Video, all states should do this:
March 2012, Governor Herbert signed HB148, Utah's Transfer of Public
Lands Act, which demands that the United States extinguish title to Federal
Lands and turn them over to the state to manage by the end of 2014. There are a
number or resources on the internet to get more background on the ACT and find
out what other western states are doing at www.americanlandscouncil.org.
This week on the County Seat we ask, What is the status of Transfer of Public
Lands in Utah?
A number of organizations such as, National Association of Counties, The
National Republican Committee, and a number of States have passed resolutions
in favor of Transfer of Public Lands.
We also had an opportunity to talk to two professors from the University of
Utah about the constitutional and political issues involved in a transfer of
public lands.
Tune in to ABC4Utah Sunday Morning at … READ THE REST
Congressman Bishop Addresses Document Showing Plot for
Federal Land Grab
Congressman Rob Bishop addresses the Administration's secret internal
document that shows planning within the Department of Interior to designate as
many as 14 new national monuments in 11 different states. Over 13 million acres
of land were proposed as possible national monument sites.
Feds vs. Raisins: Small Farmers Stand Up to the USDA
"They want us to pay for our own raisins
that we grew," says Raisin Valley Farms owner Marvin Horne. "We have
to buy them back!"
This is but one absurdity that Marvin and his wife Laura have faced during
their decade-long legal battle with the United States Department of Agriculture
(USDA). Every year, the Hornes plant seeds, tie vines, harvest fruit, and place
grapes in paper trays to create sun-dried raisins. And every year, the federal
government prevents them from bringing their full harvest to market.
It's called an agriculture marketing order. Depression-era regulations meant to
stabilize crop prices endanger the livelihoods of small farmers across the
country, but the raisin marketing order is particularly egregious. An elected
board of bureaucrats known as the Raisin Administrative Committee decides what
the proper yield should be in any given year in order to meet a previously
decided-upon price. Once they can estimate the size of the year's harvest, they
force every farmer to surrender a percentage of their crop to raisin packers
like Sun-Maid. The packers then place the raisins in a "reserve
pool," a special holding vat for raisins that cannot be sold in the U.S.
Eventually, the packers can sell the reserve pool raisins overseas at highly
discounted prices set by the government or funnel them into school lunch
programs for next to nothing.
The government allows them to sell one out of every two raisins.The farmers
were always supposed to get a percentage of the money raised from the reserve
pool raisins, but as profit margins dwindled over the years, so did the return
to farmers. The tipping point came in 2003, when farmers received zero dollars
in return for the 47 percent of the crop they had surrendered.
"You can't work for a whole year and then give 47 percent of what you made
away and still keep that business afloat," says … READ THE
REST
And it all comes back to what happened in Burns and
everywhere else in the USA where there are resources. And restricting all
citizens from their access to these fruits of their labors on a Capitalist
economic growth policy due to Climate Change, but at the same time allowing
some to access the resources….
The Clintons: is the
Oregon standoff really about uranium? by Jon Rappoport
Is uranium at the heart of the
Oregon Malheur federal-protestor standoff? That’s the question I’m asking. It
isn’t a flippant question.
I realize there are many other
issues swirling around this event. The Hammonds, the Bundys, militias, the
feds, cattle grazing on federal lands, federal land grabs, and so on. This
article isn’t meant to take apart those matters.
It’s meant to follow up on my previous article,
in which I present a circumstantial case for the Clintons’ heavy involvement in
a scheme that’s transferred 20% of US uranium production to Putin and Russia.
And the key company in that piece is Uranium One.
Remember the name. It’s apparently a major clue in what I’m about to discuss.
I also want to say, at the outset,
that I don’t know how many independent news outlets and websites are covering
the uranium question, or which outlet initiated this line of investigation. I’m
relying on one provocative January 23 article at intellihub, by Shepard Ambellas:
Down in the body of that article,
the author provides a link to a page at the US Bureau of Land Management (BLM),
which is a federal agency under the Department of the Interior.
On that BLM page (“National BLM
> OR/WA > Energy > Uranium Energy”), in …
…
What does this have to do with
Hillary and Bill Clinton? I’ll reprint my previous article so you can read the
details, but the short version is: there’s a case to be made that they, through
Uranium One and the Clinton Foundation, facilitated the sale of Uranium One to
Putin and the Russians. And if so, and if this area of Oregon is projected to
be part of that uranium mining deal, then we are looking at a stunning
“coincidence”: the US federal government is coming down hard on a group of
protestors who are occupying, for their own reasons, a very valuable piece of
territory that goes far beyond the issue of private cattle grazing on government
land.
It comes under the heading of … READ
ENTIRETY (The Clintons: is
the Oregon standoff really about uranium? By Jon
Rappoport; Jon Rappoport’s
Blog; 1/27/16)
This article says that Malheur County may be the BIGGEST
Uranium Deposit in the USA!!!!!!!
In Malheur County, the poorest in
Oregon, there is wealth buried in the ground.
It's uranium—and the county has
what may be the biggest sources in the U.S.
For the first time in decades,
someone wants to mine uranium in the state. Oregon Energy LLC, owned by an
Australian company, hopes to extract at least 18 million pounds of uranium
oxide from a 450-acre southeast Oregon site called the Aurora property.
Uranium oxide, better known as
yellowcake, now trades near $52 per pound, six times its value a decade ago.
Yellowcake is used to fuel nuclear reactors and can be processed into a form
suitable for nuclear weapons.
Oregon Energy President Lachlan
Reynolds tells WW the mine will provide uranium for domestic
nuclear plants, noting the U.S. produces only 5 percent of the uranium it uses.
…
But the project, three miles from
the Nevada border, worries some industry critics. Uranium mining—not practiced
in Oregon since the 1960s—often left hidden poisons in the earth and
groundwater. The Aurora project would be the first test of a 1991 Oregon law
aimed at policing mining operations that use chemical extraction.
"I can't think of a clearer
example of what's wrong with federal mining law," says Larry Tuttle,
director of the Center for Environmental Equity. "No one was talking about
nuclear weapons in 1872 when the law was passed."
…
Machines will scrape the earth from
an open-pit mine a half-mile in length. The heavy clay soil, placed in vats,
will be sprayed with a chemical mixture that probably contains sulfuric acid.
The acid bonds with the uranium, which is extracted, dried and sold as
yellowcake. The leftover dirt is discarded in a "tailings pile" near
the site.
The 1991 Oregon law—pushed by
Tuttle despite mining industry opposition—was intended to prevent environmental
damage that such mining has created elsewhere.
There’s GOLD up in them thar hills!
And if we have learned anything in this world of greed and corruption we have
learned to follow the money. Everyone knows that the debt notes issued by the
Federal Reserve have no value; but natural resources such as gold, diamonds,
and even uranium (which is more valuable than gold BTW) do have intrinsic value
and are real tangible things that can be traded independently.
*** Please help support our
mission in Burns, Oregon by contributing at http://thepetesantillishow.com/donate or
direct to our Paypal acoount [sic]: peter@petersantilli.com. Please also LIKE
our Facebook page to receive important updates and information from Burns,
Oregon https://www.facebook.com/guerillamedia ****
Bundy’s ranch just happens to be at
“GOLD” Butte volcano in Nevada... The same “Gold Butte” that Harry Reid wanted
to “level” out for a solar farm. Yes, let’s just level out the “gold butte” and
all those minerals, and then go to Vegas… oops, er I mean … build a solar farm.
This Gold Butte actually has quite
a wild history of government trying to take the land, including closing the
only post office in the area so that packages could not be delivered which put
a real damper on things for those trying to live in the area. Another
interesting bit of information is that the wiki page for Gold Butte Ghost Town
was recently updated to reflect “new” changes to a page for a “ghost
town”. Why would it need to be updated? Check out this … READ
THE REST (The Secret That NO ONE Wants You To Know
About The Standoff in Oregon;
By Trent-004;
Freedom from Government | Official
Website; 1/16/16)
This totally ties right into the basis for what is
driving the food and fiber producers like the Bundy’s and Finicum’s distrust
and confrontations with the Federal Government.
“President Obama’s Overwhelm the System” is what this Sue and
Settle Strategy looks like:
Wayne Allyn Root opined that
President Obama "is purposely overwhelming the U.S. economy to create
systemic failure, economic crisis and social chaos."
Conservative political commentator
Wayne Allyn Root opined back in 2010 that President Obama "is purposely
overwhelming the U.S. economy to create systemic failure, economic crisis and
social chaos."
Claim: Wayne
Allyn Root wrote in an opinion piece that President Obama is "purposely
overwhelming the U.S. economy."
CORRECTLY
ATTRIBUTED
Example: [Root, June
2010]
Rahm Emanuel cynically said,
"You never want a crisis to go to waste." It is now becoming clear
that the crisis he was referring to is Barack Obama's presidency.
Obama is no fool. He is not incompetent. To the contrary, he is brilliant. He
knows exactly what he's doing. He is purposely overwhelming the U.S. economy to
create systemic failure, economic crisis and social chaos — thereby destroying
capitalism and our country from within.
Barack Obama is my college classmate (Columbia University, class of '83). As
Glenn Beck correctly predicted from day one, Obama is following the plan of
Cloward & Piven, two professors at Columbia University. They outlined a
plan to socialize America by overwhelming the system with government spending
and entitlement demands. Add up the clues below. Taken individually they're
alarming. Taken as a whole, it is a brilliant, Machiavellian game plan to turn
the United States into a socialist/Marxist state with a permanent majority that
desperately needs government for survival ... and can be counted on
to always vote for bigger government. Why not? They have no responsibility to
pay for it.
Origins:Wayne Allyn Root, the Libertarian Party's 2008 vice
presidential candidate, is a political commentator whose columns appear on various
conservative web sites and the author of several books, including The
Conscience of a Libertarian: Empowering the Citizen Revolution with God, Guns,
Gambling & Tax Cuts. He penned a biweekly political opinion column published the … READ THE REST
Sue and Settle is a chronic disease that is affecting the
Liberties set forth in the US Constitution with the ESA.
ST. GEORGE – Inspired
by the actions of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and
his stance against federal control of public lands, a rancher on the Arizona
Strip has also declared the Bureau of Land Management to be an illegitimate
agency and said he will no longer comply with or recognize it.
“I hereby cancel all my contracts
with the BLM,” LaVoy Finicum, of Cane Beds, Arizona, wrote in a letter he sent
to the U.S. Solicitor General following his decision to no longer acknowledge
BLM or its policies. Thus far, he has chosen to discontinue paying grazing
permit fees and to ignore when the BLM allows certain allotments – or pasture
areas – to be used for grazing.
Backing beliefs with action
Unlike Bundy, who has had a
strained relationship with the BLM and similar federal agencies for over 20
years now, Finicum’s relationship with the local BLM has been largely positive
and civil.
“Some people think I’ve been
oppressed by the BLM and hassled by the BLM and things have not been going
well,” Finicum said, “but the history between me and the BLM has been very
good.”
So what happened to change
Finicum’s mind concerning the BLM and it’s [sic] oversight of public lands?
MOCCASIN, Arizona –
Pickup trucks and horse trailers filled the parking lot and stretched down the
street next to a community park in Moccasin, Arizona, Friday, as concerned
ranchers and representatives from agencies like the Arizona Farm Bureau and the
Arizona Game and Fish Department gathered together. Their aim? Fighting to save
a way of life they say is being threatened.
“They’re backing the ranchers into
a corner, and you’re going to see a lot of Cliven Bundys out there,” Bill
Gubler, a rancher from Santa Clara, said.
Gubler currently ranches on the
Arizona Strip and has cattle grazing allotments there, as do … READ
THE REST
ARIZONA STRIP – The
Mohave County Sheriff’s Office in Arizona announced Thursday
that Sheriff Jim McCabe has sent letters to federal officials in
opposition to the proposed Grand Canyon Watershed National Monument.
The Grand Canyon Watershed National
Monument would designate 1.7 million acres of Arizona land as a national
monument, including lands on the Arizona Strip and the North Kaibab and
Tusayan Ranger Districts of the Kaibab National Forest.
…
Below is the sheriff’s letter in
its entirety:
I write to express my opposition
to the formation of the proposed Grand Canyon Watershed National Monument by
presidential executive order.
Creating a new and enormous – 1.7
million acres – National Monument amounts to a significant Federal land grab.
It would add additional Federal regulation to human activity, including
ranching, hunting, and recreational access.
It is just this sort of Federal
overreached that has led to proposals for states to assume control of the huge
areas of public land in the American West. Creation of vast new National
Monuments not by Congressional open debate and action but by presidential
executive order, even while lawful, would contribute further to distrust of the
Federal action.
I ask for your support in opposing
the proposed Grand Canyon Watershed National Monument.
…
Ranchers, members of the mining
industry, hunters and others who reside, recreate and make a living in the
affected areas say such land grabs have been detrimental in other places where
they’ve occurred. They maintain that approving the designation of the
Grand Canyon Watershed National Monument will impact the livelihoods of
many, impede land use, and hinder the ability of ranchers and others to
maintain and exercise wise stewardship over the land and continue effectively
doing business.
September 9, 2011 – A
FEDERAL JUDGE approved the landmark 757 species legal
agreement between the Center for Biological Diversity and the Fish and
Wildlife Service.
November 20, 2012 – For the first
time since 1996, the number of plants and animals waiting for federal
protection dropped below 200, HIGHLIGHTING THE SUCCESS OUR AGREEMENT.
According to the 2012 “candidate notice of review” released today by the
Service, 192 SPECIES ARE AWAITING ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT PROTECTION.
February 8, 2013 – The Fish and
Wildlife Service released a four-year work plan detailing the years in
which ALL the NOT-YET-PROTECTED SPECIES IN OUR AGREEMENT would get
protective decisions or critical habitat designations.
THE “CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL
DIVERSITY” IS BATTING NEARLY 1000 “SUE AND SETTLE” ENDANGERED SPECIES.
BASED ON ONE FEDERAL
JUDGE that approved the landmark 757 species “SUE AND SETTLE” legal
agreement between … READ THE REST
This procedure might be one we would want to employ as a way
to challenge the Spotted Frog Listing, and there is an opinion in this link
that suggests that the Obama Administration is Favoring this method of use of
the ESA;
For years environmentalists have
usurped individual private property rights and thwarted economic development.
Now, thanks to Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, it appears that the job
creators may have finally learned something from the extreme tactics of groups,
like the Wild Earth Guardians and the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD),
which have been using the courts to their advantage by filing lawsuits against
the federal government.
On Monday, March 17, on behalf of
the state of Oklahoma and the Domestic Energy Producers Alliance (DEPA),
Pruitt filed a lawsuit against the federal government, specifically
the U.S. Department of the Interior and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(FWS). The lawsuit alleges the “FWS engaged in ‘sue and settle’ tactics when
the agency agreed to settle a lawsuit with a national environmental group over
the [Endangered Species Act] listing status of several animal species,
including the Lesser Prairie Chicken.”
… A “threatened” listing would
restrict the land use in the bird’s 40-million-acre, five-state habitat:
Oklahoma, Colorado, Texas, New Mexico, and Kansas. The affected area includes
private, state, and federal lands—lands rich in energy resources, ranch
and farm land—plus municipal infrastructure, such as water pipelines and
electric transmission.
…
A DEPA spokesman states:
“This designation could disrupt drilling and exploration on hundreds of
thousands of very promising oil and gas lands in this part of the country.” The
CBD has made no secret of their disdain for oil and gas extraction
and has filed many successful lawsuits specifically to block development.
Pruitt says: “the
sue-and-settle timelines force the FWS to make determinations without a
thorough review of the science. This violates the original statute requiring
sound science before listing species.”
Stephen Moore, formerly with the
Wall Street Journal, explains: “Under the Obama Administration, the feds
have entered into a consent agreement with the environmentalists to rush
forward a judgment on an unprecedented number of species. A 2012 Chamber
of Commerce study found record numbers of such ‘sue and settle’ cases
under Obama.” Pruitt adds: “Under President Obama, we have had sue and settle
on steroids.”
…
The Democrats are in a bind. The
rushed listings are being forced by the environmental base, which is myopically
focused on the anti-fossil-fuel (job-killing) agenda of restricting oil-and-gas
development on Western lands and isn’t looking at the bigger political
consequences.
It appears the decision has been
made. Sources tell me that Dan Ashe, Director of the FWS, has
called a meeting on Capitol Hill to brief the stakeholders prior to Thursday’s
announcement. If he decides to list the LPC, Pruitt’s lawsuit could be just the
first shot that ignites the new rebellion pushing states to take control of the
lands within their borders.
…
Sue and Settle
It is these tactics, along with a
friendly Obama government, that has led to the “sue and settle” procedure that
Pruitt’s lawsuit is hoping to end. The lawsuit is seeking “declaratory and
injunctive relief for violations of the ESA.” Moore reports: “The relief is
intended to overturn designations of dozens of species added to the threatened
or endangered list through the ‘sue and settle’ process.”
EDITOR'S
NOTE: The writer is addressing the question, “Does EPA's sue-and-settle policy
circumvent the legislative and regulatory process?”
…
… starting in 2009, the
Environmental Protection Agency took control of many state visibility programs,
costing states millions of dollars with no discernible visibility improvement.
And the states were not even told
it was happening. It was authorized by a Consent Decree between EPA and an
outside environmental advocacy group. EPA claimed that it had no choice but to
follow the legally binding settlement and override the states' plans.
This practice, known as “sue and
settle,” gives special-interest groups a legal mechanism to reprioritize and
control agency rulemaking activities with little or no public participation.
… These settlements all occurred
without notifying or allowing key stakeholders—the public, the states, the
regulated community or Congress—to participate.
How do special-interest groups take
control of an agency's rulemaking activities and circumvent congressional
funding priorities?
An advocacy group sues an agency to
enforce a missed statutory deadline for agency action. Rather than defend
against the lawsuit, the agency simply agrees to settle and take the action or
issue the new rule demanded by the group, within a deadline set by the group.
Without any notice to the public,
the settlement agreement and draft Consent Decree are filed with a court. Only
after the Consent Decree is filed does it become public.
Once the court signs the draft
Consent Decree, the agency is legally bound to comply with ... READ
ENTIRETY (Pro: 'Sue and
Settle' bypasses democratic process; By William Kovacs; GazetteXtra; 12/19/13)
And the Undemocratic process of Sue and Settle is being done to our Community by the same ones that
have a Massive Track Record of doing it and they need to be called out as these
links show them to be Undemocratic!!!!!!!!
Liberal Activists, Mainstream
Media, Law Enforcement Bear Partial Blame for Showdown in Oregon that Led to
Death of LaVoy Finicum
WASHINGTON, DC - Left-wing
activists and news outlets that only partially cover their activities are in
part to blame for the confrontation in Oregon that led to the death of LaVoy
Finicum, says the National Center for Public Policy Research.
That's because left-wing organizations often use civil disobedience without
consequences, which leads the public to believe law-breaking in pursuit of
political or public policy goals can take place without serious consequences.
Parts of the news media are complicit because they cover stories in ways that
help the left-wing organizations achieve their goals.
Kieran Suckling, the executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity,
a left-wing green group, was repeatedly covered in the news media criticizing
those occupying the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge (for example, here, here, here, here, here). No story we found mentioned that Suckling
has been found guilty in court (here, here) for occupying private property and refusing to
leave as
part of a political protest, or that he has been arrested (and even bragged
about it by issuing a press release) for civil disobedience as
recently as 2014.
"In yet another case of 'do as I say, not as I do,' the environmental left
is protesting civil disobedience by citizens while it practices and/or condones
civil disobedience itself," said David Ridenour, president of the National
Center for Public Policy Research.
"Kieran Suckling, the executive director of the Center for Biological
Diversity, a left-wing green group that sues the government while expecting the
taxpayers to pay its legal bills, has gone to Oregon to protest the occupation
of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. Yet he has been found guilty of much
the same offense. Occupying another's property without … READ
THE REST(Liberal Activists, Mainstream Media, Law Enforcement
Bear Partial Blame for Showdown in Oregon that Led to Death of LaVoy Finicum; By Frank DuBois;
The Westerner; 1/27/16)
Liberal Activists, Mainstream
Media, Law Enforcement Bear Partial Blame for Showdown in Oregon that Led to
Death of LaVoy Finicum
Left-Wing Civil Disobedience Often Goes Unpenalized, With Media Complicity
Is It Any Wonder Some Conclude Civil Disobedience is a Safe and
Consequence-Free Activity?
Washington, D.C. -
Left-wing activists and news outlets that only partially cover their activities
are in part to blame for the confrontation in Oregon that led to the death of
LaVoy Finicum, says the National Center for Public Policy Research.
That's because left-wing
organizations often use civil disobedience without consequences, which leads
the public to believe law-breaking in pursuit of political or public policy
goals can take place without serious consequences.
As the presidential election
heats up, ask yourself which candidate will repeal WOTUS, get control of the
EPA and allow ranchers to get back to work without being held back by unfair
regulations.
Don’t hold your breath for any of
them to “repeal WOTUS” etc. There is not a dime’s worth of difference in any of
them. They are all under the influence of radical environmentalism (because it
is PC and being PC is necessary to get elected).
But, at least it is encouraging
to see a main-stream rag like Beef Magazine is finally beginning to pay
attention to what is going on in the (about to get really) Wild West. — jtl,
419
I don’t know about you, but in my
opinion, the 2016 presidential election can’t come soon enough.
For the 22nd time during his nearly
eight years in office, President Obama has taken advantage of the Antiquities
Act of 1906, locking up millions of acres of land in the western states.
Obama’s designations total 265
million acres, and his most recent designation of the Sand to Snow National
Monument, Mojave Trails National Monument and Castle Mountains National
Monument totals 1.8 million acres.
With several months left in office,
Obama is expected to designate another 10 million acres of land in Oregon,
Arizona and Utah. What’s worse, Obama will more than likely continue to use his
executive power when making these designations without any public comment
period or economic studies.
Locking out this land under the
guise of protecting it negates the fact that ranchers with grazing permits pay
to run the ground and also are responsible for the management of those leases.
Somehow I have my doubts about the federal government’s abilities to manage
this expansive amount of land,
and with our nation’s multi-trillion dollar debt, I don’t see how there is
enough funding available to make improvements, control weeds, manage bison and
elk herds, and fight fires on this land.
Of course, this is just the tip of
the iceberg when it comes to ranchers fighting the
governmentagainst a powerful land grab. In fact, an … READ
THE REST (Ranchers losing
ground in government land grab; By Amanda Radke; Land & Livestock International,
Inc. – Originally in Beef
Daily; 2/29/16)
Environmental
shakedown through bastardized application of science, policy, and education.
Disgruntled ex-federal employees found a way to bilk taxpayers out of millions
of dollars using the flawed Endangered Species Act.
Over a 3-year period, 2009-2012,
Department of Justice data show American taxpayers footed the bill for more
than $53 million in so-called environmental groups’ legal fees—and the actual number
could be much higher. The real motivation behind the Endangered Species Act
(ESA) litigation, perhaps, could have more to do with vengeance and penance
than with a real desire to protect flora and fauna.
On May 7, I spoke at the Four
Corners Oil and Gas Conference in Farmington, New Mexico. During the two-day
event, I sat in on many of the other sessions and had conversations with dozens
of attendees. I left the event with the distinct impression that the current
implementation of the ESA is a major impediment to the economic growth, tax
revenue, and job creation that comes with oil-and-gas development. I have
written on ESA issues many times, most recently I wrote about the lesser
prairie chicken’s proposed “threatened” listing (which the Fish and Wildlife
Service [FWS] listed on March 27) and
the Oklahoma Attorney General’s lawsuit against the federal government over the
“sue and settle” tactics of FWS and the Department of the Interior.
While at the conference, I received
an email announcing that FWS has asked a federal court for a 6-month delay in
making a final determination on whether to list the Gunnison sage grouse as an
endangered species—moving the decision past the November elections. Up for
re-election, Senator Mark Udall (D-CO) “cheered” the extension
request. The E & E report states: Colorado elected
leaders “fear the listing could have significant economic impacts.”
Kent Holsinger, a Colorado
attorney specializing in lands, wildlife, and water, posited: “Senator Udall is
among those lauding the move—perhaps because a listing decision would affect
his fate in the U.S. Senate. Gunnison sage grouse populations are stable, if
not on the increase. In addition, myriad state, local and private conservation
efforts have been put into place over the last decade. Those efforts, and the
Gunnison sage grouse, are at risk if the FWS pursues listing.”
The report continues: “WildEarth
Guardians is not opposing the latest extension after Fish and Wildlife agreed
to some extensive new mitigation measures that will be made in the interim,
including increasing buffer zones around sage grouse breeding grounds, called
leks, and deferring coal, oil and gas leasing, said Erik Molvar, a
wildlife biologist with WildEarth Guardians.” It goes on to say: “But the
Center for Biological Diversity, which is a party to the settlement agreements
with WildEarth Guardians, said the latest extension is a bad move for the
grouse, which it says has needed ESA protections for years.”
Two important items to notice in
the Gunnison sage grouse story. One, the power the environmental groups wield.
Two, part of appeasing the environmental groups involves “deferring coal, oil
and gas leasing.”
It is widely known that these
groups despise fossil fuels. The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD)brags about its use of
lawsuits to block development—but it is not just oil and gas they block, it is … READ
THE REST (Environmental
shakedown through bastardized application of science, policy, and education;
By Marita Noon; Committee
For A Constructive Tomorrow; 5/14/14)
