Breitbart – by Bob PriceThe U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Oklahoma Field Office responded to Breitbart Texas about the so-called Red River “land grab” by emphasizing that parcels in question are already held in the public domain and BLM-managed. The Bureau claims it is not they who are declaring the ownership but that settled case law long declared it to be government land.
BLM Public Relations Specialist Paul McGuire agreed to a one-on-one telephone interview with Breitbart Texas after reading the original report published earlier this week. In contrast with the interview with Texas General Land Office Commissioner Jerry Patterson, McGuire expressed much more confidence about the ownership of the land and indicated little, if any, ambiguity about how or why the land should be under federal control.
“It’s not the BLM making any such claim as to the status of the land,” McGuire said. “That land was a matter that the courts adjudicated decades ago, going back to the 1920s in fact. The Supreme Court settled the matter as to where the public land in the Red River was. So, BLM is really just proceeding on those earlier court decisions.”
Both McGuire and Patterson agreed about the unique set of political and historical circumstances that led to this situation of confusing and apparently conflicting laws regarding the property ownership and control of land along the Red River boundary between Oklahoma and Texas. However, there is disagreement on a couple of major sticking points.
Commissioner Patterson believes strongly that, as part of the planning process, a survey project must be completed to determine exactly where the boundaries are located, and, if they have moved, what the cause of the movement was as the cause relates directly to ownership changes. Patterson also questions why the BLM suddenly feels the need to manage land they have ignored for decades–if not centuries.
Following is the complete audio recording of the interview with BLM spokesman Paul McGuire:
For direct comparison, the Breitbart Texas interview with Texas Land Commissioner Patterson can be found below.
Follow Bob Price on Twitter @BobPriceBBTX
“The Bureau claims it is not they who are declaring the ownership but that settled case law long declared it to be government land.”
BAHAHAHAHA!! Oh man, the arrogance of these sick sons of bitches.
SEND IN THE MILITIA and then we’ll see what they have to say about it. This unconstitutional entity (BLM) must be exterminated, like the parasite that it is!
They’re saying that BLM owned the land since the Louisiana Purchase? The BLM wasn’t even around then, so how the hell is that even possible?
Only TERRITORIES are owned by the federal goverment. when Texas became a state/it CEASED TO BE FEDERAL TERRITORY. THE ONLY FEDERAL TERRITORY THAT EXIST NOW IS THE 10X10 SQUARE MILE AREA OF WASHINGTON D.C. ITS EVEN STATED IN THE 1789 CORPORATE CONSTITUTION. THE FEDS DONT OWN SHIITE.
the Texas constitution not only reserved the right to be an independent republic, but also reserved the rights to all public lands not owned privately.
Texas also reserved the right to secede if tyranny tried to over-run state sovereignty. its so simple a caveman can read it, but these dumb-ars federales think they can lie-lie-lie themselves into stealing all this land. notice that this is only happening in states that are actively resisting the nwo-federal encroachment of tyranny. IF ALL ELSE FAILS, GO READ THE INSTRUCTIONS, FOLKS!.
PHUKK OFF AND DIE-BLM.
Well said!
” “That land was a matter that the courts adjudicated decades ago, going back to the 1920s in fact. The Supreme Court settled the matter as to where the public land in the Red River was. So, BLM is really just proceeding on those earlier court decisions.””
No, they are going against what was Constitutionally mandated: that all the property within a “new” states border belongs to that state but was held in trust by the federal government UNTIL that state got its republican form of government up and running.
The federal government is ALLOWED to buy property from the states for specific purposes ONLY. The ONLY land that they own is that 10 square miles called Washington DC. The rest had to be purchased:
Article One, Section 8, Clause 17 states: To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings.
Article I, Section 8, Clause 17, doctrine of equal footing, whereby new states admitted to the Union were to enter it on an equal footing with the original states meaning that all states OWNED the land within their designated borders that was NOT turned over by the federal government. They even went against the SUPREME LAW OF THIS LAND and the CONTRACT THAT THEY MUST FOLLOW TO BE USING LAWFUL AUTHORITY. That is correct, when they do not keep the oaths required of them by the US Constitution they no longer are any better then a gang, or any other thug. The “color of law” is NOT the law here in the USA just because the ignorant, domestic enemies, or outright traitors are willing to enforce it.
Dr. Edwin Vieira:
“This has nothing to do with personalities or subjective ideas. It’s a matter of what the Constitution provides…
The government of the United States has never violated anyone’s constitutional rights…
The government of the United States will never violate anyone constitutional rights, because it cannot violate anyone’s constitutional rights. The reason for that is: The government of the United States is that set of actions by public officials that are consistent with the Constitution. Outside of its constitutional powers, the government of the United States has no legitimacy. It has no authority; and, it really even has no existence. It is what lawyers call a legal fiction.
… the famous case Norton v. Shelby County… The Court said: “An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties. It is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.”
And that applies to any (and all) governmental action outside of the Constitution…”
What are the defining characteristics of a limited government? They are its disabilities; what it does not have legal authority to do. Look at the First Amendment… What does it do? It guarantees freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion. But how does it do that? I quote: “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press” etcetera. “Congress shall make no law;” that’s a statement of an absence of power. That’s a statement of a disability. (End quote of Dr. Vieira)
If its already yours then why did you tuck tail and run?
why are you slandering Bundy?
If it was already YOURS than why is REIDselling it to the Chinks?
Already yours???
That kind of thinking will earn you a short drop with a sudden stop.
BLM, the hired mercenaries of our own federal government, are walking on thin ice when it comes down to roughhouse tactics. These thugs piss off the wrong people and they’ll find out what it’s like when someone opens up a can of whoop-ass on you. These hired thugs think we won’t know where they live, where their wife works, or where their children go to school. You want to get down and dirty, we can go there.
Geeze Millard, sounds like I am rubbin` off on ya. I love it and yes we do know where they live and it is only a matter of time – no if`s about it, but when dang it. They – the leo`s and tptb – have bought their ticket and it is time for them to pay up and get out or be buzzard bait IMOHO.
They do not belong except on some deserted island way out in the middle of the damned ocean to eliminate themselves by themselves and to leave us real Americans the F alone.