The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: CollectivismMustDie on June 06, 2016, 05:16:04 PM
-
http://www.naturalnews.com/054106_Bureau_of_Land_Management_seizures_liberty.html
After imprisoning Oregon ranchers, Obama to sign an executive order legalizing BLM tyranny to take over any land it wants
Monday, May 23, 2016 by: L.J. Devon, Staff Writer
An even greater BLM land grab is in the making
U.S. Congressman Rob Bishop recently sent out a press release about 14 pages he uncovered from a Department of Interior (DOI) internal memo which details the Obama Administration's plot to bypass Congress, and make it easier to confiscate and federalize land into the jurisdiction of the BLM.
The DOI memo reveals that a large BLM land grab is in the making. The pages reveal the need for an executive order which would bypass legislative hurdles by using an "Antiquities Act" to appropriate "cultural land" to be confiscated and managed by the BLM. The executive order would seek to target the "acute" problem of private land ownership that is adjacent to land already governed by the BLM. The targeted land includes 412,675 acres.
"In order to expand this network of treasured lands to include the diversity of landscapes currently managed by the BLM," it states. The DOI memo also reveals, "The BLM recommends that any major funding increases be phased in over a five-year period to allow the BLM time to build capacity in order to accomplish the increased work-load."
The war on private property ownership will continue in the West, as the BLM plans to take more and more land. The cries will grow louder to return public lands to the states, as individuals are forced to defend their private property against the federal government.
With this in mind, it makes perfect sense why they went after the folks at the refuge in the way that they did:
"Lets make a really strong example of these people, because we have something in the works that is going to rile them up even worse if we don't."
Disgusting. :censored:
That this is a long term plan, should tell you all you need to know about how elections should change government, but mostly don't. The infestation of unelected bureaucrats is more or less fatal at this point.
CMD
-
With this in mind, it makes perfect sense why they went after the folks at the refuge in the way that they did:
"Lets make a really strong example of these people, because we have something in the works that is going to rile them up even worse if we don't."
Disgusting. :censored:
That this is a long term plan, should tell you all you need to know about how elections should change government, but mostly don't. The infestation of unelected bureaucrats is more or less fatal at this point.
CMD
We know where Hillary will stand on this. What about Trump? He is a firm believer in the taking of private property for the so-called "public good".
-
We know where Hillary will stand on this. What about Trump? He is a firm believer in the taking of private property for the so-called "public good".
I doubt if lowering its value by forbidding any productive use would fall into his definition of 'Public good,' though I am against using eminent domain to take land from private individuals so that other private entities can develop it. It should only be used, and then as rarely as possible, to take property that is necessary for fulfilling specified government functions like erecting public buildings and roads.
-
I doubt if lowering its value by forbidding any productive use would fall into his definition of 'Public good,' though I am against using eminent domain to take land from private individuals so that other private entities can develop it. It should only be used, and then as rarely as possible, to take property that is necessary for fulfilling specified government functions like erecting public buildings and roads.
As I understood it, for decades, eminent domain was only used in cases where the government, whether local, state or federal acquired the land.
-
As I understood it, for decades, eminent domain was only used in cases where the government, whether local, state or federal acquired the land.
You're correct. It's only in recent decades that the concept of seizing private property to turn it to a more tax-revenue-producing use (Ultimately in the hands of a private owner different than the original one) has become popular. Needless to say, the possibilities for graft, corruption, and legalized theft of property for personal enrichment are practically unlimited.
-
Did anyone else see the slippery slope in the quote from the article?
The executive order would seek to target the "acute" problem of private land ownership that is adjacent to land already governed by the BLM.
So, you own some land next to BLM lands, and I own the plot on the other side. They can take your land, and now I own land adjacent to BLM land, meaning they can take MY land, and then my neighbors, and so on. This isn't about 400K acres. This could extend to ALL non-developed land nationwide.
-
Is anyone really surprised by this? Barry and his henchmen have been doing this for a long time now, and yes, the government bureaucrats that work both sides of the aisle tend to salute the flag of the party in power.
Self-preservation at its finest.
-
Is anyone really surprised by this? Barry and his henchmen have been doing this for a long time now, and yes, the government bureaucrats that work both sides of the aisle tend to salute the flag of the party in power.
Self-preservation at its finest.
Not a bit surprised.