Quote:
Originally Posted by rodneynboalich
Bills that pass over night are set up to do with the sponsor and supporters all working together to make it happen...nobody was supporting hr511 after the knowing clause was added. The sponsor didn't even show up for the second hearing...so no hr511 couldn't have passed in 30 days when no one was trying to pass it....try and keep up with reality
|
It now has gone from impossible, I am lying to yes it can. You are showing a very interesting pathology.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodneynboalich
If that's the legal definition of continental US the it's in direct contradiction of how it's used in 18 usc 42.
|
Where does it define it in 18 USC 42? I would love to have you draw a clock. I am getting the feeling that your reality is not the same as anyone else's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodneynboalich
Where do you keep getting this right or wrong nonsense. .and the law does care about right and wrong. Laws are in place to determine the set of rules a society is to live by.. and the laws are determined by sets of principals of right and wrong... right and wrong are the underlying basis for laws....xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ....seriously you're trying so hard to argue me that you're saying stuff that doesn't make sense. ....and yes Fws does have to be RIGHT about their listing of invasive animals....they have a whole set of rules to follow to list anything. .and that's one of the things usark is saying they didn't do is follow the rules...Fws can't just list anything. ...if they want to list something they have to prove they would be RIGHT for doing so. ..... these animals were added to the lacey act in the injurious part do to their listing as invasive under US Law. .injurious and invasive have to different definitions..the lacey act doesn't say anything about fws feeling they may be a problem....that's not where the authority to do preemptive listing come from....it comes from executive order 13112 which said the secretary of the interior can do invasive listing with Fws when Fws has shown data that proves said animal they want to list is potentially invasive. ...and of course the judge didn't look at right and wrong that's not what you do in a hearing for a preliminary injunction. ..the judge looked at it to see if usark meets the criteria to be granted the preliminary injunction. ......
|
You are back to posting a wall of incoherent text. You are back to insulting. Mr. Boalich, you know why you have to insult when you can not prove your point? It shows a lack of reasoning about reality. It tells me that you may need to have some medications you need to take. Insulting is in violation of the rules of this forum. I will have to report you.
Laws have nothing to do with right or wrong. Just legal or illegal.
There is a thousands laws that are 100% unethical, but completely legal.
I can legally pay an employee minimum wage, even though I know they could never live in my area with that much money.
I would recommend you read Plato's Republic.
Slavery was once 100% legal and completely unethical. It is 100% ok to kill another person, if that person is not born yet. I could go on an on.
The FWS does not have to right to produce a law. It just has to produce the law. FWS does not have to prove it is correct, just that it is legal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodneynboalich
You really need to stop acting as usarks mouth piece on here.....people are reading your nonsense and if they support usark and don't like the things I'm saying that's fine...but they don't need you to feed them misinformation. ...and usark certainly doesn't need an uninformed supporter handing out lessons in legal process and the current direction of their case......especially on that thinks laws aren't bases in right and wrong and also thinks thinks the lacey acts says Fws can't list whatever it wants on a whim. ....
|
I have nothing to do with USARK. You are trying to sandbag the argument. Interesting pathology. As for FWS listing, yes, it can. It can also get sued and proven illegal in court.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodneynboalich
You need to tell usark to come on here and clear up all the misinformation you have posted about them....It's one thing when I say stuff in a critical manner of usark...and is a totally different and destructive situation when a usark supporter comes on here with little knowledge of what's going and starts making claims about usarks case the legal and legislative process what is the basis of usarks arguments against fws and and complete lack of foresight when it come to the reaction of government when challenged on this level. .....
|
The problem with "all the misinformation you have posted about them" is this. You are not in the right frame of reference for anyone to clear up your thinking. Once again, I have nothing to do with USARK. I came into this forum to see if you had a valid argument. It is becoming very clear that you have metal disorder. I am not insulting you, just stating a preconceived fact in which you have proven.
You claim that USARK does not have the foresight, but yet offer no other insight into the problem. You just say they are wrong, with out telling them how to be right. It shows that you have a compulsive disorder. I fear it might actually contain a narcissistic tendency. Every find you are talking to idiots and only you are correct?
Quote:
Originally Posted by rodneynboalich
And one last point... hr511 that usark decided to fight after no one was supporting would have added retics green anacondas and boas to the lacey act. ...now executive order 13112 gave Fws the right to do listing without the legislative process when bills like hr511 where getting held up by things like what usark was doing...ie setting up hearing to attack it....if usark would have left hr511 alone Fws wouldn't of had an excuse to go the executive order route claiming hr511 was purposely being held up..and with the knowing clause added to hr511 Fws wouldn't support it or want it to pass since they worked so hard to have a knowing clause removed from the lacy act 30 years ago. ...hr511 in its live active state was the best protection we had against further big snake listing. ..and usark destroyed that with their totally unnecessary hearing the set up in the subcommittee of the house natural resources committee. .and lol so wyatt could have one more big payday by creating a false victory...which lead to hr511 not getting reintroduced in the next session just like with the original ban..
|
Another wall of incoherent text. You are not perceiving the world correctly. I am personally worried about you.
You are back at HR511. I will just state this again. Is it a bad thing to make money off something they know is not going to pass so they can have money for the next fight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren_Booth
One last thing. In the eight years of being on the board of USARK, I have never been contacted by you other than in a message left on my faunaclassifieds account page (which all can view). I responded (which all can see) but received no response from you. As such, I cannot confirm that you have contacted the board in regards to anything.
Take care,
Warren
|
I would not deal with this person. He is not swimming with the other ducks.
Linear Mode
