Minimize

Welcome!

Bob discusses the recent actions in Nevada by the BLM

Big Al
April 15, 2014

Click download link to listen on this device: Download Show

Here are some interesting links regarding this situation: http://www.naturalnews.com/044695_BLM_surrender_cattle_released_government_tyranny.html

From Judge Andrew Napolitano: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oZPLIzuWKIw

Interesting situation, huh?

Discussion
39 Comments
    Apr 15, 2014 15:45 PM

    If you can pay for something and yet not own and control it then buying it is a bad idea.
    Except if you can leave and take it with you.

    bb
    Apr 15, 2014 15:17 PM

    The Onondaga nation is asking for the land back the U.S. government stole from them after treaties were signed.
    The government says they’ve “owned” it too long for them to deal with it now.
    Hmmm, I guess Bundys family being on t land for 140 years is not long enough.
    As for this Harry Read…Alex Jones has some choice words about him.

      Apr 15, 2014 15:44 PM

      I believe it is Reid.

      A lot of us have some choice words about him!

      Apr 15, 2014 15:57 PM

      Alex Jones – my kind of Christian bb!

        bb
        Apr 15, 2014 15:05 PM

        I didn’t no Mr Jones was christin, but I really don’t no much about him.
        I no he supported Ron Paul, and does what he can to enlighten people about the American government
        But that’s about all I no about him.

          Apr 15, 2014 15:38 PM

          bb He says things from time to time that convinces me he is (Christian).

    bb
    Apr 15, 2014 15:23 PM

    This incednt shows to me that some americans have finally had enough.
    Its more than this one event, the lies and corruption have gone on longer than almost anyone can list.
    I see it as a good sign and hope they don’t start another war to get people focused elsewhere yet again.

      Apr 15, 2014 15:45 PM

      Yep, I certainly hope that they don’t either!

    bb
    Apr 15, 2014 15:33 PM

    As for a 2nd American revolution, it could be.
    But I don’t see it as dramatic as the first one.
    The battlefields shouldn’t be the same, more likely to be small in comparison and described as incidents. Later as events.

      Apr 15, 2014 15:45 PM

      Maybe some skirmishes but that is about all that I see as a possibility.

    Apr 15, 2014 15:41 PM

    Sorry Bob? What exactly do foreign wars have to do with the Bundy’s?

      GH
      Apr 15, 2014 15:51 PM

      Control of the narrative, birdman, control of the narrative. C’mon–you’re a smart guy, it’s not that hard to understand.

        Apr 15, 2014 15:06 PM

        Kind of a stretch don’t you think?

    GH
    Apr 15, 2014 15:46 PM

    May there be a revolution, but a peaceful one! It’s a matter of people informing themselves, and deprogramming themselves (with sites like this one). It will be a tough row to hoe–virtually all Americans are deeply brainwashed.

      GH
      Apr 15, 2014 15:52 PM

      I’d be surprised (and dismayed) if BLM offices look like swiss cheese. Fed overreach, yes, but that would not be a good development.

        Apr 15, 2014 15:23 PM

        It was an insane inappropriate comment. Is Bob trying to promote a civil war or something? I am sure he realizes that making those kinds of public statements might be seen by some as an inducement to less stable members of society to act in a dangerous, unpredictable way. He is speculating of course. There is no way Bob can know what will happen one way or another but it strikes me that he is more intent on planting seeds of strife than just offering mere off the cuff opinions. He has suggested that armed civilians will attack government facilities with loaded weapons and shoot up the buildings as an outcome of public outrage over BLM actions. Problem is, some of us do not support the Bundy’s. Lots of us do not support the Bundy’s. Nor do we support those who use their own anti-social political agendas to sow discourse and promote acts of terrorism on popular radio shows. Bob should be ashamed of himself but I am quite sure he feels confident and cocky as he has the platform to push his anti-government agenda here and create discourse that is socially destabilizing by suggesting threats that might actually lead to casualties of Federal employees. There was a popular radio show in Rwanda once too and the host there was almost single handedly responsible for sowing the seeds that led to the genocide that resulted in more than a million deaths….so we should take this kind of threat seriously. Time for Bob to take a holiday maybe before he ends up an a list.

          bb
          Apr 15, 2014 15:21 PM

          Another site I visit thinks the way you do on this topic Bird.
          I just don’t trust a single word from this government, maybe I am blinded by that in this situation.
          They have just lied too often for me to take anything they say as credible.

            Apr 15, 2014 15:49 PM

            What is the site BB? What is bothering me here is that if Bob says X or Y or Z will happen and then afterwards it actually happens then it will appear he may have participated indirectly or even been responsible. I really wish he would not make suggestive specific threats.

            bb
            Apr 15, 2014 15:54 PM

            Bird, its not a site that discusses investing etc.
            Its a site that peolpe play the board game “risk”. Just everyday working people.
            From anywhere in the world, mostly American.
            Their discussions are generaly family oriented.
            On occasion they might talk about who they intend to vote for or maybe some incident in the news.
            I asked them what they thought about the Bundy situation.
            It was unanimously on the side of the government.
            I doubt 1 of them could tell you that gold is money for example, the age range is between 40-60.

          Apr 15, 2014 15:35 PM

          Probably already on a list. I think he is more of a Constitutionalist Than someone who is simply trying to cause trouble.

            Apr 16, 2014 16:55 AM

            Yeah, good point. All of us are probably on a list.

            Apr 16, 2014 16:40 AM

            So what Bird? We are doing the right thing by expressing our collective opinions. None of us are suggesting anything other than suggesting common sense.

        Apr 15, 2014 15:17 PM

        Agree

        Apr 15, 2014 15:44 PM

        Totally agree GH.

    Apr 15, 2014 15:49 PM

    Really glad you raised this Bob/Al. The Bundy affair is Waco revisited except this time around with the benefit of Social media. Sen Reid is obnoxious; the BLM (from some of the videos) came close to starting a shooting war, and Bundy deserves to have all his grazing fees waived outright. Quite right that the ranchers told Reid’s bully boys to go back to China.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/nevada-rancher-cliven-bundy-inspects-cattle-for-damage-by-feds/

      Apr 15, 2014 15:35 PM

      And you, I really do not have any respect for your point of view either. Bundy is on the wrong side of the law. Remember rule of law, Andrew? Or have you English now sunk below of the heathens you once ruled?

        Apr 15, 2014 15:38 PM

        As an aside, if it were up to me I would just declare the Bundy lands and the surrounding area a Federal Park and expropriate the whole parcel putting an end to the discussion. Let hat absorb the next twenty years of his life in courts until his bank account is drained.

        Apr 15, 2014 15:38 PM

        COME ON BIRD………you are in Africa…..you need to come back to American and go to some gun shows….Rule of law…..have you been reading any of The Obama executive orders…………….come on man……………

          Apr 15, 2014 15:39 PM

          SPOT ON ANDY………..BIRD IS DEAD WRONG ON THIS ONE…………..OOOOOTB

            Apr 15, 2014 15:41 PM

            btw…………I have not insulted you …………just do not agree..

            Apr 16, 2014 16:28 AM

            Of course I am dead wrong Jerry. Dead wrong on everything because none of it agrees with the majority opinion on this site. I get it though. Nobody here made any money these last few days. They all took the wrong side of the trade as usual. Look how much venom some of them spew after the fact. It s pure rage but they have only themselves to blame. They will never admit they are wrong or their theory is flawed.

          Apr 16, 2014 16:16 AM

          Good morning BIRD………….thanks for the reply,
          I did not say, you were wrong on everything………only, think you are not correct on this subject……..OVERREACH OF ARMED ,GOVT.that should be serving the public, that is paid by the public.
          Since, I am LONG term………I care not what happens on short term daily market cycle action. I do think everyone needs to be civil, but, that does not mean everyone needs to agree, but, should share their thoughts in a civil manor. ……..Respectfully……jootb

            Apr 16, 2014 16:42 AM

            Many thanks Jerry

        Apr 15, 2014 15:43 PM

        Is rule of law the main issue here?

    Apr 15, 2014 15:34 PM

    Bob M………is correct the American people are POed……………
    Al,,,Bob M closer to the truth, than you think…….

    Apr 15, 2014 15:28 PM

    An article titled, ‘Reid Smelling Anything But Rosy In Bundy Ranch Fight,’ focuses on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid teaming up with Chinese billionaire Wang Yusuo, founder of Chinese energy giant ENN Group, to win incentives, including land 113 miles southeast of Las Vegas, that ENN sought to buy for $4.5 million, (less than one-eighth of the land’s $38.6 million assessed value). Bloomberg reported ENN intended to create solar energy farms on the Nevada land.

    Bloomberg further documented ENN had contributed $40,650 individually and through its political action committee to Sen. Reid over the previous three election cycles. Subsequently, on Sept. 4, 2012, Breitbart.com reported lawyer Rory Reid, the son of Sen. Reid, had been appointed the primary representative for ENN Energy Group, fronting the bid by the Chinese company to build a $5-billion solar panel plant on a 9,000-acre Clark County desert plot in Laughton, Nevada. A Reuters report published on Aug. 31, 2012, documented that Reid was recruited by ENN during a 2011 trip he took to China with nine other U.S. senators, supposedly to invite Chinese investment in the United States.

    Harry Reid’s well publicized comment on the Bundy vs. BLM standoff, “It’s not over.” could bring to light more unattractive details related to Reid BLM Chinese arrangements that explain the huge Federal Government show of force over so called “turtles.” Further details on wnd.com.

    Apr 16, 2014 16:29 AM

    The dept of the Interior does not have the money to keep our Natl Parks open & yet they have the money to attack the Bundies & American Freedoms………..the ideals they are charged with having on display for the American people!

    bj
    Apr 17, 2014 17:52 PM

    Seems to me everyone is barking up the wrong tree. The Bundys have long standing on this land–open notorious use that compliments doctrine of estoppel by laches. Thus via the argument of adverse possession why don’t they simply claim title to the land??

    Rather than explain adverse possession in my own words here’s a quote that rings the bell:

    “Copyright (c) 2008 Parmdeep Vadesha

    Adverse land possession is a common law practice wherein someone acquires title to another person’s land after occupying such property for a number of years without challenge or permission from the true owner.

    The theory on adverse land possession is based on some deeply-rooted morality. The main basis on this law is to compel landowners to keep a vigilant eye on their property, especially those that are far away. What the law on adverse possession punishes are those who neglect to do what should be done to maintain his property, thus causing damage to another. Adverse possession is based on the doctrine of estoppel by laches, or failing to act on one’s rights to the prejudice of another. This law does not seek to unduly reward a person who fails to do his duty to protect his property, thus allowing another to stake a claim over it.

    Adverse land possession is completed when the following criteria are present in the scenario:

    1. Actual possession. To be considered as adverse possession, the adverse possessor, or disseisor, must physically use the land and alter its current state. Actions of this kind include planting or harvesting crops, keeping livestock and constructing buildings or other improvements. Paying taxes does not amount to actual possession, although it may be an indicator of a claim of right.

    2. Open and notorious occupation. The disseisor’s use of the property must be visible and apparent to all people, including the true owner. His occupation must be of a character that is not covert, such that the true owner cannot deny knowing such fact. Open and notorious occupation may be evidenced by the construction of fences, buildings, posted signs or the presence of animals or crops.

    3. Exclusive and hostile. The disseisor occupies the land to the exclusion of everyone else, including the true owner. Furthermore, the disseisor occupies the land without the property owner’s consent or permission and against the true owner’s rights.

    4. Continuous. The disseisor must show that he has occupied the land continuously for a specific period of time. The statute of limitation begins to run from the time adverse possession started to take place, not from the time the true owner was dispossessed of his land or left his property untended. The courts have ruled that occasional cutting of timber or occupation at intervals do not satisfy the continuity requirement. Moreover, if the true owner has ejected the disseisor and after some time, the adverse possessor returns to the land and occupies it, he cannot count the time prior to his ejection, since his occupation has been disrupted.

    In England and Wales, the law on adverse possession used to be governed by section 15 of the Limitation Act 1980. Under the old law, the limitation period, meaning the time that the land must be continuously occupied, is twelve years. After which, the title of the previous owner is automatically extinguished and transferred to the adverse possessor. The adverse possessor then becomes the true owner of the land.

    The old law, based on common law and statutory provisions, has been largely criticised for not giving the true property owner his day in court. In 2002, the Land Registration Act was enacted. Under the new law, the adverse possessor needs to apply to be a registered owner of the property after ten years of continuous occupation. The transfer of land title is no longer automatic. The Land Registry then gives notice to the paper owner who has 65 days to object. If the objection is granted, the true owner will have two years to evict the adverse possessor and regain his property. This law is held by many to be better, since a land owner’s rights can no longer be removed without his consent.”

      Apr 17, 2014 17:14 PM

      That whole situation is almost as much of a joke as Harry Reid!