HR 1505: Statement of National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers

by Zack Taylor, Vice Chairman, NAFBPO.org

[Mr. Taylor is referring to these letters by Bullock and Tawney. – Ed]

I am writing for National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers, (NAFBPO.org), concerning HR-1505, found here: http://naturalresources.house.gov/UploadedFiles/MU_HR1505_Bishop.ANS.pdf

HR-1505 is a mere three paragraphs long. Note that the law sunsets after five years and it only exempts Customs and Border Protection from the environmental laws enumerated in HR-1505, none of which existed when The Immigration and Nationality Act was passed.

Please take the time to read HR-1505 and the two letters attached above from Attorney General Bullock, Land Tawney of Montana Hunters and Anglers and this letter from Chuck Baldwin, wherein they accuse supporters of HR-1505 of what they, Steve Bullock, Land Tawney and Chuck Baldwin, are encouraging and that is a gigantic land grab to exclude law enforcement and citizens from federal public lands.

Steve Bullock and Land Tawney have not returned emails or called, a second call is in to Chuck Baldwin today. Apparently they do not want to be confronted with the truth about HR-1505.  This is where you come in.  What this bill is about must be communicated to your listeners and readers.  It is too important an issue not to fully share.

I have already interviewed extensively with John S. Adams, Great Falls, and Alex Sakariassen, Missoula, about the truth surrounding HR-1505.  I visited Montana for two weeks in August 2011 and interviewed current and retired Border Patrol Officers.  I shared the situation and photographs with John & Alex.  I showed them the locked gates, the Kelly Humps, the boulders in front of the gates and told them about the Forest Service practice of hiring illegal aliens.  I was disappointed in the resulting articles as they fell far short of disclosing the true scope of HR-1505 or why NAFBPO supports the legislation.   Understanding that the subject may be difficult to grasp for people not fully familiar with the subject I am sending it to all of you in written form to facilitate comprehensive communication.  Here is the bare bones of the subject.

HR-1505 is about ensuring that the U.S. Border Patrol has physical access to the actual border for the purpose of securing the border. The idea here is that Congress is Communicating to the Department of Interior and the Department of Agriculture that Border Security is more important than various environmental regulations and that Congress is instructing DOI and DOA to stop interfering with Border Security operations.  To read the three paragraphs of HR-1505 clearly outlines the intent of the legislation.

The Border Patrol must have access to the actual border in order to patrol the border and secure the border. The reason HR-1505 is proposed is because Department of Interior and Dept of Agriculture are intentionally shutting off unfettered Border Patrol Access to the physical border and HR-1505 clearly says that to anyone that reads the bill that DOI and DOA must stop doing that.  Moreover, when these agencies lock out the Border Patrol they are also locking out the outdoor recreational users and commercial users of the same federal public lands.  Now that is a land grab which opponents of HR-1505 are actively engaged in and blame HR-1505 supporters of to gloss over their intentions.  Amazing.

What is Border Security and how is it obtained? NAFBPO contends that Border Security has two foundational components, National Security and Public Safety.  America can obtain both by ensuring that every law, policy, rule or regulation that is drafted, proposed or passed concerning aliens, illegal aliens, external borders or immigration ensures the maximum level of National Security and Public Safety for America and the American people above all other considerations.  That means that neither are compromised to any extent for any reason, especially for a Pup Fish, Pine Martin, Hare or Grizzly Bear.  HR-1505 was solely drafted to ensure that a maximum level of Border Security is obtained by sweeping existing blocks of that goal out of the way of the U.S. Border Patrol.

Don’t believe it? Go back and read HR-1505 again.  Now, go back and read the letters from Steve Bullock, Land Tawney and Chuck Baldwin again.  Bullock, Tawney and Baldwin are saying this:

We don’t care about National Security or Public safety. We don’t care the Department of Interior and Department of Agriculture are locking up federal public lands to everyone, including the Border Patrol.  We don’t want the U.S. Border Patrol to be able to secure the border.  A secure border is not important to us.  The Pine Martin and Grizzly Bear are more important than the lives and security of America and her people.” 

Friends, on this issue there is no middle ground. Don’t go there because you will be viewed as an apologist for those that wish to see America and Americans harmed.  We do encourage you to look at HR-1505 and the attached documentation and simply give your readers and watchers the truth.

Zack Taylor, Vice Chairman
NAFBPO.org
shorty@dakotacom.net

3 thoughts on “HR 1505: Statement of National Association of Former Border Patrol Officers”

  1. I sure did not see where MR Baldwin wrote those things. I think that the opponents to the bill would be mollified if the wording in the bill was changed to be more specific! The problem I have with bills written in vague language is that they always cause more problems than they fix.
    If this is truly a massive problem, and I think that here in AZ, we have a lot of issues with land that gets closed arbitrarily by the environmental agencies, then it should be important enough to get it right! Let's start writing bills in plain language that the general public can understand, and that will solve lots of problems!
    We have the BLM, here in AZ, attempting to steal 1.4 million acres of AZ land! The thing is that this land is actually the main conduit for the flow of drugs northward into the US! And, they want to keep the militia out of this area. Have we been making an impact down there???
    AZRanger

  2. I, for one, do not like the idea that a government organization can come into Montana or any other sovereign state and poison the water or leave behind an environmental disaster. This seems evident based on the suspension of environmental laws and acts all so they can construct new roads and buildings to house their operation. I am not willing to trade away my Liberty in the name of government protection. The government can not protect us from the boogey man, whether that boogey man is a False Flag operation or a real threat. I am willing to stand in the gap for my family and I suspect many more Americans feel the same way. It is time for the federales to go back to DC and for the sovereign citizens in the state that they reside to take back state land from the federal government.citizenssovereign citizens of the st

  3. I would like to complete my thought after technical difficulties left me sounding illiterate at the end of my previous posting. It is time for the sovereign citizens in the state that they reside to demand the federal government remove its presence in from state lands. The federal government has not one deed to any land that they claim to be federal land. I suspect that if a local farmer wanted to do some sort of improvements to his property and it endangered a species then the feds would shut him/her down immediately. However, HR 1505 allows the feds to ignore their own laws. Welcome to Rule of Law in the Ole USofA. This reminds me of the good old days of the white man speaking with forked tongue and kicking Indians off of reservations because we found gold or silver on it.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.