Heartwood to file suit against forest plan

if the US FOREST SERVICE DONT CUT THE TIMBER THEY ARE GOING TO BURN IT ALL UP IT ABOUT TIME FOR THEM TO START BURNING AGIAN.

For stupid a.. reason Forest Service has banned the use of Smokey The Bear and his image. Go figure? O! if anyone is interested, Smokey The Bear's middle name IS "The"

I could very well be that the various federally "managed" lands are leined up to the IMF/World Banque/UN as a asset backing all the perpetual national debt. Perry Clark a democrat Rep from a conservative district including forest land near louisville did some research about 10yrs ago and got the run around in Frankfort looking for the constitutionally required state permission for the U.S. to own various federal forest in Kentucky. Since no one I know of has produced any legislative record to date, it seems like some homesteading is in order, go stake a claim if you can file motions or know a "good" lieyer perhaps they'll give you that 40acres and a mule?LOL?

heavily redacted current article to consider, look back into previous edits for more infomation and a hint at how phobic the wiki's are for anything hinting at a consensys-"conspiracy "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Boone_Nat...

I think that is supposed to be spelled Slartybar[t]fast?

I suppose if no one objects near about anything can be published in the Federal Register and after the required comment period and with no countermanding by congress (or the public?), the buearcrassy practices are to go ahead with their own or the particular executive directive, this has been going on for a loooong time. Some alledged legislation and crafty wordsmithing has gotton around the constitutional provisions for , forts magazines and other needfull buildings clause that is what I think is being referred to here. Express state/State Legislative permission is required for the Fed or general government to purchase land within one of the "several states" and the forrest lands are "managed" not technically owned by the fed, it must therefore not be a true federal area in a jurisdictional sence BUT when a local government complets a memorandum of understanding with a Fed agency this contracts them to co-operate and file charges when a violation of some regulation occurs, hense the U.S forrest service can get traffic violations run thru a state court? Does that make sence?
The taxes that would be on federal land if in a "resident's" stakeholdership is satisfied from a permanent fund proceeds as "payments in lue of property taxes" since it would be rediculous for the government to pay itself taxes to a local government. The "permanent fund" is likely invested in lots of specutlative financial instruments like dirivitives or various safer areas of investment. Someone likely gets a good commision for management of the perminant fund, and the county (or city) benifits from the sweeter bond ratings they get out of having this percieved stable revenue source. It is quite a financial shell game or a crafty solution to set aside lands to be in a state to support nature recreation and yes logging. Is it legal? Well they got the big guns and funds for the dream team to squash any challengers to these skemes, "do not be overwise...why should you die before your time" is the quote that comes to mind from the scriptures?
That is not a threat just a observation?

"They" are imposing overarching(fornication) on top of any sense of a State or the "Several States" being anything other than a federal district.

the 10th and 11th amendment and perhaps the entire constitution has been nullified since the 14th amendment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_po...

This constructive fraud is like a cancer eating away at any real chance at something even resembling freedom and liberty otherwise known as a lie. Perhaps the Al Qaida(toilet) terrorists are correct in references to "the great satan" great as it big lie.

Dave Crockett is quoted "The government that is big enough to give you what you want is big enough to take what you have"