Personal Liberty Digest – by Sam Rolley
Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy’s unfortunate racially-charged remarks have overshadowed the Federal show of force that descended upon his cattle operation last month. But as many lawmakers have scrambled to distance themselves from the rancher, one Republican Congressman from Utah remains focused on the bigger picture: too much Federal power.
Representative Chris Stewart, a member of the House Appropriations Committee, is considering a measure that would cut funding for “paramilitary units” operating under the control of the Internal Revenue Service, the Bureau of Land Management and a number of other bureaucratic Federal agencies.
Speaking on the House floor this week, Stewart reminded lawmakers of the concerns at the forefront of the land dispute before Bundy’s inartful observations about race in America were reported by a New York Times reporter.
“There are lots of people who are really concerned when the BLM shows up with its own SWAT team,” he said, noting that there are dozens of other government agencies with similarly armed units. “They’re regulatory agencies; they’re not paramilitary units, and I think that concerns a lot of us.”
For more than two decades Bundy has failed to pay fees required to graze his cattle on Federal land. After he lost in two separate attempts to have the nearly $1 million in fines and fees dismissed, a court ordered Bundy’s cattle rounded up and removed from the land.
Officials subsequently blocked road access to Bundy’s ranch and a small army of armed Federal agents surrounded his property. As the ordeal continued, some of the rancher’s cattle were shot and his son was tasered by BLM agents.
Furthermore, much of the land the agency claimed it was protecting was trampled by the army of Feds.
The BLM only called back its armed agents when confronted by armed members of civilian militias who showed up in support of Bundy.
Despite Senator Harry Reid’s (D-Nev.) ridiculous claim that Bundy’s supporters are “domestic terrorists,” the BLM was taking action against an insubordinate rancher— not a homicidal maniac. Many small government advocates were justifiably appalled about the government’s heavy-handed response to what essentially amounted to failure to pay a bill.
Stewart told The Salt Lake Tribune that the situation would likely have turned out differently if BLM had relied on local law enforcement for protection while dealing with Bundy.
“They should do what anyone else would do,” Stewart said. “Call the local sheriff, who has the capability to intervene in situations like that.”
Stewart isn’t the first lawmaker to question why so many Federal bureaucracies boast units of heavily-armed agents.
Responding to Reid’s “domestic terrorist” claim last month, Republican Senator Rand Paul told a radio station in his home State of Kentucky, “
“I think there’s an opposite thing to what Harry Reid said, and that’s the federal government shouldn’t violate the law, nor should we have 48 Federal agencies carrying weapons and having SWAT teams,” <a “nofollow”=”” href=”http://personalliberty.com/rand-paul-questions-number-armed-federal-agents-criticizes-governments-treatment-rancher/” target=”_blank” style=”color: #2255aa;”>Paul said.
The Senator’s father, former Texas Congressman Ron Paul, gave a passionate speech all the way back in 1997 decrying the growing army of armed Federal bureaucrats.
“Under the Constitution, it was never meant to be a Federal police force,” Paul said on the House floor at the time. “Even and FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation), limited only to investigations, was not accepted until this century. Yet, today, fueled by the Federal government’s misdirected ‘war on drugs,’ radical environmentalism and the aggressive behavior of the ‘Nanny State,’ we have witnessed a massive buildup of a virtual army of armed regulators prowling the States where they have no authority. The sacrifice of individual responsibility and the concept of local government by majority of American citizens has permitted the army of bureaucrats to thrive.”
Later in the speech, Paul remarked, “It is ironic that the proliferation of guns in the hands of the bureaucrats is pushed by the anti-gun fanatics who hate the second amendment and would disarm every law-abiding American citizen. Yes, we need gun control. We need to disarm our bureaucrats, then abolish the agencies. If government bureaucrats like guns that much, let them seek work with the NRA.”
Today, estimates suggest that there are <a “nofollow”=”” href=”http://personalliberty.com/watchdog-depth-federal-arms-race-surprise-shock-citizenry/” target=”_blank” style=”color: #2255aa;”>more than 25,000 armed personnel working under bureaucratic Federal agencies.
http://personalliberty.com/congressman-mulls-legislation-defund-armed-federal-bureaucrats/
You had better rethink this bullshit you traitorous assholes.
Because what happens if you don’t will resemble you clowns ending up looking like walking spaghetti strainers. And tell that wannabe transvestite Dirty Harry to cough up the illegal land he has acquired and return the stolen loot, because if he doesn’t, the son will pay.
You are outnumbered thousands to one. This means you are finished.
Good morning Mark, I have a feeling the MSM hasn’t sufficiently trashed the Militia at the Bundy ranch yet and nothing will happen in so far as an assault this weekend. Be sure to expect the dirty deeds by the BLM to be unreported and all the MSM following their marching orders to vilify the freedom fighters at the Bundy ranch. Maybe they’ll dredge up Janet Reno for a consult since she has extensive experience in this area!
Hi Millard
Janet Reno is honeymooning with his wife German Chancellor Merkel at the moment, not sure if they brought their daughter Chelsea Clinton along, but wouldn’t be surprised.
Yes, the BLM will be low key from now on, and so will we. They bring in thousands, so will we. Currently, they are trying to figure out how to arrest anybody that was holding a gun at the last standoff.
This thing is going to slow burn for awhile yes, then all hell is going to break loose. The Chinese will NEVER BE COMFORTABLE here, there will always be conflict. They have over played their Chinese checker strategy with America and her people.
Amen, brother!
“Today, estimates suggest that there are more than 25,000 armed personnel working under bureaucratic Federal agencies.”
That’s OK, no worries. There are more than 100 million armed American patriots fighting and working to protect and defend the freedom of this country against those same unconstitutional, corrupt, bureaucratic Federal agencies.
25,000? HA! No contest. Those agencies don’t have a leg to stand on.
Don’t disarm them. I need some of their stuff. Give ’em all night vision scopes.
Bundy was not being racist he is right; slavery of the spirit is worse than physical slavery and further we all are being enslaved by government regulations fraudulently crafted which do nothing to secure peace or freedom, and in fact thwart our very basic rights to pursuit of happiness as individuals and communities. This is about deep-state thuggery for profit, in this case sending more profits to China (as if it wasn’t bad enough). And why? Because our representatives negotiated fraudulent loan agreements with banks with intent to enslave the populous in dept. Executive order 13037 signed 3/3/197 by Clinton says it all; we are now “improvements” on the land with value added if we have provisions that “aid our health and welfare” (health insurance). Is that not what slavery is, being collateral owned by others to be bought, sold and otherwise forced to engage and participate in efforts at the owners will not ours? Consider the ADA which makes health insurance mandatory and directly increases our value as collateral for the government to borrow money against. If we and the land are now collateral on debt, what happens when the government can’t pay the debt with currency anymore and the lender want’s the collateral instead? Maybe they start taking the land and then, if their still is a balance outstanding they will try and take the people. Knowing they have accumulated more debt than they can ever pay off does not paint a pretty picture for the future of the average citizen in America and the land they think is theirs, especially since China appears to be wanting it’s collateral at least the land part in lieu of currency and our government is apparently prepared to give it to them. Detention camps are in-place and every state and federal agency has become an armed agent responsible for making sure the collateral is protected and the debts get paid on time without default. But, we still have a chance so long as we stay armed and keep speaking out; they don’t want to risk destroying the collateral unnecessarily and worse yet, risk people finding out the truth and deciding not to play along en-mass. So they will label Bundy a racist and try and side-track the truth of his message which if heard, understood and heeded by even half the population would end the whole tyrannical affair in probably less than a year.
Great insight by the way, this had me thinking for a while…good stuff.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.
I’m not an improvement on Bill Clintons land scheme, I’m another one of Bill Clintons failures. Just like I’m one of Obamacares biggest failures. As I’m sure many of us are.
China is in far, far worse shape then we are. It’s true they need more land to horrifically pollute and mismanage. But they can’t even handle their own people, much less even a few real Americans. Who owns China is my question? China prints money just like us, do they not? Are the American people going to accept US politicians borrowing printed money from China, at interest rates that cannot be fully calculated because of fractal reserve lending principles, just so we can give it to Syria, Ukraine, Egypt, etc… to corrupt their democracies? You scam me once because of my honest and trusting nature and then come back to collect some more and I’ll come out “swinging”, that’s a fact.
With forty eight agencies, it would be interesting to hear a sample from each agency on the rule of law. Don’t take the sample Officers or Sargents, get it from grunts. Like a multiple choice question — just to see where there heads are at.
But it’s probably impossible to get such sample without going up against some frigging policy they set up.
For these big mouth politicians, I’d like to see how many can even NAME all of those agencies without looking at government book, or accessing government networks.
I believe (opinion now) things are fractured in this respect. Look back at 2004, DHS. They couldn’t get their oath breaking ducks in a row, it was a mess, go read some old Government Technology magazines at the time. It was several years for them to get DHS up in any capacity at all.
That agency is POISON to the Constitution, and bill of rights, the Constitution and Bill of Rights can NOT EXIST with the DHS.