| Online: | |
| Visits: | |
| Stories: |
| Story Views | |
| Now: | |
| Last Hour: | |
| Last 24 Hours: | |
| Total: | |
At The Bundy Ranch: A ‘Rosa Parks Moment’? Exclusive: Alan Keyes Wants American Voters To Demonstrate Resolve Of Nevada Family
WND
The dispute over their grazing rights on land administered by the federal government brought the Bundy family into tense confrontation with the Obama faction. Obama and his cohorts intended to make an example of the Bundy family, one that would discourage all Americans tempted to stand on their rights from doing so. But what was supposed to be a spectacular execution, striking fear into the heart of Americans who still think they live in the land of the free, has instead demonstrated the fact that at least some Americans have gone beyond thinking. They have taken action.
Following the example of previous generations of Americans, they formed a 21st-century instance of one of the committees of correspondence, which were the backbone of America’s resistance to the intended tyranny of the British government in the run up to America’s war for independence. Instead of the prospect of an intimidating victory over one isolated, vulnerable family, the Obama faction faced the common resolve of an organized community of citizens asserting their right to self-government.
It was supposed to be a chilling exercise of factional dominance. Instead it was shaping up to be a Rosa Parks episode, likely to serve as the byword for inspiring citizens throughout the nation to act on what it means to be American. Worse still from the would-be tyrants’ viewpoint, the Obama faction would come off looking like the bullies they most certainly are, arrogantly drawing first blood in their bid to crush the spirit of American liberty.
Now there are reports indicating that corrupt motives are at work in the U.S. government’s adamant effort to assert its “ownership” of the grazing land used by the Bundy ranch. A case can be made that the U.S. government’s management of the land was a form of permanent arbitration, intended to reduce the likelihood that local disputes would lead to violent confrontation. But arbitration makes sense only if the arbitrator is an “honest broker,” i.e., someone who has no prejudicial interest in the outcome. The U.S. government’s role is to help manage the land, not to help itself to the land. It is to be managed in the interest of the locals, who are thus acknowledged to own the usufruct, i.e., the right to derive profit or benefit from the property.
Of course, the actual intention of the U.S. government’s delegated land-management role is of no importance to Obama and his minions. Their aim is to “nationalize” the land, using whatever legal pretext is available. As an excuse, they look for some legalistic pretext for asserting ownership the U.S. government was never intended to possess, along with the power to determine how land is used without any regard for what is fair to local interests and good stewardship of the land. What is happening in Nevada is just a foretaste of things to come, as proposals move forward that will have the effective of allowing the Obama faction to assert pharaoh-like national ownership of much of the economically valuable land in America.
Reposted with permission
