Started By
Message

re: BLM vs. Nevada Rancher

Posted on 4/22/14 at 1:26 pm to
Posted by WildTchoupitoulas
Member since Jan 2010
44071 posts
Posted on 4/22/14 at 1:26 pm to
quote:

No, you are taking posts from different responses and intertwining everything...

Wha...?

The quotes were from consecutive posts.
quote:

I never said "They want to apprehend Bundy"...

I said you said:
quote:

But why show up with SWAT teams?

The dude obviously leaves the property to go to the local store or whatnot. Apprehend him when he is by himself.

Which is here.
quote:

And when I said "the story changes" in regards to removing the cattle from the land... The operation started off as them confiscating the cattle and planning on selling them to recoup the "Million Dollars" in back fees.


Oh, I thought yuou were accusing me of changing the story. What the BLM intended to do with Bundy's cattle may have indeed changed - over the course of twenty years. So yes, their story may have changed.
quote:

If they only wanted him to removed the cattle from the land, why weren't the feds simply herding them towards his property...

That's not their job.
quote:

instead of rounding them up, penning them, and trying to ship them out?


This became their job when Bundy refused to remove his cattle. First they offered to sell the cattle for him, and give him the money for them. THEN, after years of refusing to cooperate, they decided to recoup part of their losses by selling the cattle. But apparently the CBA may have said that it was just better to kill them and bury them. I don't know, I don't really care, that's beyond the point.
quote:

Whatever you answer is just going to mix up 3-4 different posts and not be along logical lines of thinking.

I swear this is like the fricking Twilight Zone or something.

I've been perfectly consistent: If Bundy is in the wrong, the BLM has acted reasonably. I suspect that Bundy is NOT in the wrong and the courts may have screwed him.

If the courts have unjustly stripped Bundy of his water rights, the government is at fault and should pay Bundy some restitution.

The problem I'm having is in trying to put your argument in any kind of coherent structure. The best I can get is that if they want to remove Bundy's cattle, they should arrest him while they do it. I have a problem with arresting someone if there is no evidence of criminal wrong doing. Perhaps if you could just spell it out in simple terms, without asking me any questions, or accusing me of anything, just spell out your position.

But first start with: do you think Bundy is in the wrong?
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram