Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta militias. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta militias. Mostrar todas las entradas

sábado, 9 de enero de 2016

Obama's officious Oregon owners...







BigThink - Strange Maps [Link]

Probably not making it onto many people's radar in current news was the take-over by ranchers in Oregon of a state wildlife protected area (Malheur); even if your read about it I bet nary an eyebrow was raised or you just thought a bunch of US hicks were restless. For me, having historical family farming connections both here and in the US (in England going back centuries) and being involved with cattle in one respect or another most of my life, it is of great interest; especially because if I had the money I'd retire to my own ranch! What many don't realise about this issue (not the first) is that the government owns most of the land (see map, click to enlarge): an average of over '47% of the 11 coterminous western states' (including 84.5% of Nevada!) and over 69% of Alaska. Now you know why Texas (only 1.9% federal owned) wants independence.



"The Obama administration has pushed our livelihood to the brink" [Keith Nantz in the WaPo]. You can sympathise when you realise that the Obama government does what governments do, especially and more religiously when it comes to the pointless and prejudice weight of regulations, usually following the modern Gods of 'green' and man-made climate change. Keith adds,"Most of the time, those regulations are written by people with no agriculture experience, and little understanding of what it takes to produce our nation’s food. The agencies that control these lands can add burdensome regulations at any time. Often, they will begin aggressively enforcing them before ranchers have a chance to adjust." If you're interested in the full story go HERE (it's a long one: pictures, maps and videos included).

The capacity for problems arising with the government is immense when - as mentioned above - you look at who owns the land; read Frank Jacobs: "Imbalance of Federal Land Ownership Sheds Light on Oregon Militia".



Update: more interesting reading and maps; How The Feds Got All That Western Land (and Why It's a Problem) [Link] by Ryan McMaken at Mises Institute and Nobody lives Here: "...4.61 million square kilometers were reported to have no population living inside them. Despite having a population of more than 310 million people, 47 percent of the USA remains unoccupied."

Obama's officious Oregon owners...


BigThink - Strange Maps [Link]
Probably not making it onto many people's radar in current news was the take-over by ranchers in Oregon of a state wildlife protected area (Malheur); even if your read about it I bet nary an eyebrow was raised or you just thought a bunch of US hicks were restless. For me, having historical family farming connections both here and in the US (in England going back centuries) and being involved with cattle in one respect or another most of my life, it is of great interest; especially because if I had the money I'd retire to my own ranch! What many don't realise about this issue (not the first) is that the government owns most of the land (see map, click to enlarge): an average of over '47% of the 11 coterminous western states' (including 84.5% of Nevada!) and over 69% of Alaska. Now you know why Texas (only 1.9% federal owned) wants independence.

"The Obama administration has pushed our livelihood to the brink" [Keith Nantz in the WaPo]. You can sympathise when you realise that the Obama government does what governments do, especially and more religiously when it comes to the pointless and prejudice weight of regulations, usually following the modern Gods of 'green' and man-made climate change. Keith adds,"Most of the time, those regulations are written by people with no agriculture experience, and little understanding of what it takes to produce our nation’s food. The agencies that control these lands can add burdensome regulations at any time. Often, they will begin aggressively enforcing them before ranchers have a chance to adjust." If you're interested in the full story go HERE (it's a long one: pictures, maps and videos included). The capacity for problems arising with the government is immense when - as mentioned above - you look at who owns the land; read Frank Jacobs: "Imbalance of Federal Land Ownership Sheds Light on Oregon Militia".

Update: more interesting reading and maps; How The Feds Got All That Western Land (and Why It's a Problem) [Link] by Ryan McMaken at Mises Institute and Nobody lives Here: "...4.61 million square kilometers were reported to have no population living inside them. Despite having a population of more than 310 million people, 47 percent of the USA remains unoccupied."

sábado, 31 de enero de 2015

Oncoming oppression...






...or 'further' oppression really: the BBC today reported that the new regulations that Venezuela has introduced essentially allow soldiers to open fire if they feel their lives are at risk during demonstrations, "The rules specify a scaled approach to maintaining public order, up to and including the use of deadly force" [edit]...if they feel their lives are at risk, right.



Naturally Citizen rights groups (and everyone not directly involved) realise these rules are "dangerously vague".

You may feel rules controlling protests are reasonable but, as The Devil's Excrement blog says, the are effectively legalising military repression; "The Interamerican Commission on Human Rights has explicitly banned the use of the Armed Forces on matters of internal security". More from Caracas Chronicles on the same thing: "Last year, mass protests were shamelessly quashed by fierce repression, tear gas, beatings, jailings and torture pretty much out in the open, for the whole world to see. This year, they´ll be repressed before they even happen."



Thing is, everyone thinks this is to repress the actual known 'Opposition' but most probably it is a message to the armed civilian militias (you know, formed for the 'war of resistance against the United States') who always said they would go into the streets to defend the revolution. Well the revolution has stalled and puppet clown Nick's dictatorship is telling them 'come for us and you know what's waiting.' 

Oncoming oppression...


...or 'further' oppression really: the BBC today reported that the new regulations that Venezuela has introduced essentially allow soldiers to open fire if they feel their lives are at risk during demonstrations, "The rules specify a scaled approach to maintaining public order, up to and including the use of deadly force" [edit]...if they feel their lives are at risk, right.

Naturally Citizen rights groups (and everyone not directly involved) realise these rules are "dangerously vague". You may feel rules controlling protests are reasonable but, as The Devil's Excrement blog says, the are effectively legalising military repression; "The Interamerican Commission on Human Rights has explicitly banned the use of the Armed Forces on matters of internal security". More from Caracas Chronicles on the same thing: "Last year, mass protests were shamelessly quashed by fierce repression, tear gas, beatings, jailings and torture pretty much out in the open, for the whole world to see. This year, they´ll be repressed before they even happen."

Thing is, everyone thinks this is to repress the actual known 'Opposition' but most probably it is a message to the armed civilian militias (you know, formed for the 'war of resistance against the United States') who always said they would go into the streets to defend the revolution. Well the revolution has stalled and puppet clown Nick's dictatorship is telling them 'come for us and you know what's waiting.'