Monday, April 14, 2014

BUNDY OWES 'ZIP' TO THE FEDS - SCOTUS CANNOT RULE!

Submitted by: Donald Hank
 
The Constitution spells out the uses of land for which they can be acquired by the Feds. This land does not qualify. The transfer was also not approved by the state legislature. Of course, it is argued that the feds purchased the land and it was therefore theirs. However, it was already homesteaded by Nevadans before the Feds moved in, and originally, the rights of these homesteaders and cowboys were recognized, as Bundys ancestors were treated with respect and given the grazing rights. These rights must be grandfathered in because the Feds had no compelling interest in claiming the land at any time during the 140 odd years the Bundys were using the land, and therein lies a major legal hurdle for the Feds.
Compelling interest is always the key issue in such cases at law.
The solution is not to allow the Supreme Court to decide this case because they are part of the federal government and therefore represent a conflict of interests. The solution is for the state to nullify the false ownership of the land by the Feds and to bar BLM activity in Nevada.
The people of Nevada must subject each candidate for state legislator to a litmus test: Do you recognized the legitimacy of the federal government's claim to land in Nevada?
If the candidate says yes or hems and haws, he needs to be rejected.
Don Hank
 
 
----- Original Message -----
To: DRA
Sent: Monday, April 14, 2014 6:59 PM
Subject: [DRA] IT IS NOT FEDERAL LAND !!!

CLIVEN BUNDY AGREES
PUBLIC LAND IS NOT FEDERAL LAND.
LAND TRANSFER IS NEITHER THE ISSUE NOR THE SOLUTION.


"It doesn’t matter what happened before statehood.  What matters is what has happened at the moment of statehood.  Now, if you think about that in the second.  At the moment of statehood.  What happened?  At the moment of statehood the people of the territory become people of the United States with the Constitution with equal footing to the original 13 states.  They had boundaries around them, a state line.  And that boundary was divided into 17 subdivisions, which were county. I live in one of those counties: Clark County, Nevada.  And in that county, Clark County, Nevada, we elect our county commissioners, which is the closest to we the people, and we elect the county sheriff and we pay him to do what? Protect our life, liberty and property. I’m a citizen of that county. I abide by all the state laws.

"Essentially, Bundy is saying this conflict isn’t inherently about grazing fees or water rights, but that he ultimately does not recognize the lands to be federal and the United States government or the BLM do not have jurisdiction on the land."

I agree with Bundy, with one important distinction.


  AN IMPORTANT POINT OF CLARIFICATION


 THE PEOPLE ARE THE STATE

According to Black's Law Dictionary 5th Edition (found on page 1262), the definition of State is "A people permanently occupying a fixed territory bound together by common-law habits and custom into one body politic exercising, through the medium of an organization government, independent sovereignty and control over all persons and things within its boundaries..." In other words, the People are the State.


STATE LANDS BELONG TO THE PEOPLE

The expression "State land" is correct, but only when properly understood to mean the People's land. Americans have been greatly deceived and are utterly confused because they don't understand the meanings and legal distinctions between words. "State" and "State government" are not synonymous. They are two very different things. Supreme Court decisions confirm this fact. And it is a very important distinction, because one implication as that state lands do not belong not to the state's government. They are an asset, a treasure if you will, that belongs to the People, either individually as private property, or collectively as public land.


THE "GOVERNMENT" OF A STATE IS NOT THE "STATE"

What, then, is government? Government representatives are agents of the People, receiving their authority from the People, and accepting the duty to exercise this authority on behalf of the People to support and enforce the national and state constitutions.

Therein lies the problem.

Currently, many if not most state and local representatives are in breach of their fiduciary duty to the People by taking money from the federal government. In so doing, they create a massive conflict of interest, effectively becoming agents of the federal government, more concerned about the money than the People's rights. I know this first hand. Many, if not most, county representatives, for example, are more concerned about what the local federal agent has to say than what the People say, for fear of pissing off the federal government and losing the money. That's why we are losing our rights and lands; how Common Core education is creeping in; and how Agenda 21 gets traction.

In so doing, our representatives become co-conspirators in the unconstitutional expansion of federal authority; breach their fiduciary duty to the People and to their constitutions; and act under color of law; all of which have legal remedies, not just political ones.

As bad as those implications are, one only understands the full impact by understanding the fraud behind our current "monetary system". "Money" "given" to a state by the federal government is borrowed from the privately owned federal reserve system These debts are never repaid. They become perpetual debts, growing with interest. Like a snowball rolling down hill, they just continue growing until they consume all of our personal and national wealth and property, and the People are enslaved, forever laboring to pay off debts that cannot be repaid. Thus, the states' acceptance of federal "money" just deepens and accelerates our slavery. There is a reason why "bond" is the root word for "bondage".

It's about time the People wake up, and act accordingly.


WE EITHER RESTORE LOCAL GOVERNMENT, OR SUFFER GLOBAL GOVERNANCE.


KIrk MacKenzie
______________________________
_______

No comments:

Post a Comment