BLM Eyes 90,000 Acres of Texas Land

[Revmitchell]

After the recent Bundy Ranch episode by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Texans are becoming more concerned about the BLM’s focus on 90,000 acres along a 116 mile stretch of the Texas/Oklahoma boundary. The BLM is reviewing the possible federal takeover and ownership of privately-held lands which have been deeded property for generations of Texas landowners.

Sid Miller, former Texas State Representative and Republican candidate for Texas Agriculture Commissioner, has since made the matter a campaign issue to Breitbart Texas.

“In Texas,” Miller says, “the BLM is attempting a repeat of an action taken over 30 years ago along the Red River when Tommy Henderson lost a federal lawsuit. The Bureau of Land Management took 140 acres of his property and didn’t pay him one cent.”

Miller referred to a 1986 case where the BLM attempted to seize some of Henderson’s land. Henderson sued the BLM and lost 140 acres that had been in his family for generations. Now the BLM is looking at using the prior case as a precedent to claim an additional 90,000 acres.

Congressman Mac Thornberry (R-TX) represents the ranchers in this region of north Texas. According to Thornberry’s legislative analysts, the issue of the ownership of this land dates back to the Louisiana Purchase of 1803. When the BLM made the claim on Henderson’s land, their position was that Texas never had the authority to deed the land to private parties and therefore it would fall under federal control.

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/04/21/The-Eyes-of-the-BLM-are-on-Texas

 

[Revmitchell]

This looks like the Admin is looking for any backdoor means to take over more and more land under fed control.


They better quit this mess or there will be an actual civil war.

 

[just-want-peace]

This looks like the Admin is looking for any backdoor means to take over more and more land under fed control.


They better quit this mess or there will be an actual civil war.

Don't you think that this is PRECISELY what the ZERO is hoping for?? MARTIAL LAW!!!!!!
Call me a conspiracy theorist, but I put nothing past him & ZERO Jr (Holder) that will advance their aims!!!

 

[webdog]

I think these are all trial runs to see just how the people would respond to something on a grander scale. I feel something major happening in the next 2 years.

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

I agree with Rev, JWP and Webdog. This country is heading for civil war or martial law, or both. I have said it before and been scoffed at, but I don't believe the Little Marxist Dictator is willing to give up the White House. I think he will find an excuse to use an illegal implementation of the National Emergencies Act to seize permanent power. Yes, I know Democrats screamed hysterically that is what President George W. Bush was going to do.

Fact is, Democrats are unhinged. Witness their "doublespeak" approach to the midterm elections, insisting "black is white, good is evil, love is hate." These "Newspeak" phrases, straight out of Orwell's 1984, cover everything from "tolerance" to the healthcare act. This trend is indicative of their being totally out of touch with reality. They believe the "doublespeak" just like the fictional Marxist/federalists in 1984 believed it. None of them will think it strange, illegal nor unconstitutional when the LMD eventually seizes power via executive caveat. None of them will be concerned, right up to the point someone shoots them, that the American public will not allow it.

Lest you think the National Emergencies Act cannot be used in such a fashion, I assure you, it can be. Although it contains language which limits any "emergency declaration" by a president to two years, requires Congress to reaffirm the existence of the emergenc-(y)(-ies) every six months, requires an accounting of expenditures that are "directly attributable to the exercise of powers and authorities" resulting from the emergency declaration, and even forbids the President from invoking any statutory powers made available in the event of an emergency unless the President “specifies the provisions of law under which he proposes that he, or other officers will act,” there is absolutely nothing in the act that guarantees it will be terminated, by Congress nor anyone else. We'd have to depend on the military to end such an "emergency," but the LMD has covered that contingency as well.

Ask yourself, why have well over 100, some say nearly 200, combat-experienced, conservative military officers been fired or forced into retirement since this pitiful excuse for a man came into power? Why are liberal, reform-minded military officers with virtually no combat or national emergency experience being appointed to command positions previously held by decisive, patriotic men who have not only commanded others in war, but literally taken up arms themselves? What purpose does the loss of such talent serve? Particularly in light of the fact that this number of dismissals and forced retirements is more than four times more than have occurred in any administration since Andrew Johnson?

A sympathetic, puppet Congress will keep the National Emergencies Act declaration by this Little Marxist Dictator in force as long as he or some other wants it in force. He doesn't uphold the law now. He doesn't adhere to the law now. He regularly circumvents or just outright breaks the law when he feels like. What matter will it be to him to declare a non-existent emergency that allows him to hold onto power beyond January 20, 2016? Answer: None, and he won't hesitate to issue such a declaration.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

come on guys....they need land for FEMA trailers.

Is that mustang land? round them up & send them to Canada & Mexico so the Japs & Europeans can have equine stakes with their wine. Govt gots a nice bidness goin oun!

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

come on guys....they need land for FEMA trailers.

Those are for the "joycamps." (look 'em up, but make sure you include "1984" as a qualifier on Google) :laugh: