Well then don't go. What do you care if others take up a cross you aren't willing to carry?Agree. But, if I'm going to put my life on the line, it's not going to be for some crusty desert rat whose religious and political beliefs I don't support.
Well then don't go. What do you care if others take up a cross you aren't willing to carry?Agree. But, if I'm going to put my life on the line, it's not going to be for some crusty desert rat whose religious and political beliefs I don't support.
I doubt that "taking up the cross" is an appropriate metaphor for a bunch of lunatics standing in a formation that could be taken out with one HE round.
Agree. I don't like the idea of government snipers in the midst of an obvious small-change dispute. I don't even like university cops pepper spraying students at UC Davis in the middle of a sit in. People have the right to object whether they are correct in their facts or not.
But, it is troubling that so many could be duped into potentially sacrificing their lives for bad facts. Maybe they didn't care. Ignorance is bliss. But I sure don't consider their "victory" anything but idiotic.
Agree. But, if I'm going to put my life on the line, it's not going to be for some crusty desert rat whose religious and political beliefs I don't support.
If someones rights are being trampled, their personal beliefs are a non issue as I could be next.
Rights? He has a court order determining that he has no "right" to the use of public lands for his private purposes. What is so hard to understand here?
Rights? He has a court order determining that he has no "right" to the use of public lands for his private purposes. What is so hard to understand here?
I'll have to disagree and I'll defer to a more tactical butterscotch explanation for why.
[video=youtube;NvIlIKmySkI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NvIlIKmySkI[/video]
I think BLM overreacted. It's a small case and they should have put a lien on his property and gone to court for seizure of his bank accounts (at the most). Sniper teams gets everyone's hackles up.
Does Adverse Possession work against the government?
no, they excluded themselves from that provision
Nice, huh?
On the contrary, the metaphor is entirely appropriate.I doubt that "taking up the cross" is an appropriate metaphor for a bunch of lunatics standing in a formation that could be taken out with one HE round.
I'm sure they don't give a hoot what your opinion of them is. To some, government overreach is government overreach, whether the impetus for the action is justified or not.Agree. I don't like the idea of government snipers in the midst of an obvious small-change dispute. I don't even like university cops pepper spraying students at UC Davis in the middle of a sit in. People have the right to object whether they are correct in their facts or not.
But, it is troubling that so many could be duped into potentially sacrificing their lives for bad facts. Maybe they didn't care. Ignorance is bliss. But I sure don't consider their "victory" anything but idiotic.