nuclear deterrence via real estate - the inevitable cyclical scenario we tried to avoid.
--- author: XXXXXXX XXXXXXXX subject: nuclear deterrence via real estate - the inevitable cyclical scenario we tried to avoid. message-id: CAGiqvQmZhS1x9uFJ date: 2024-04-10 ---
What I do not understand about this sorted wretched affair is that the antagonists either do not understand or do not care what the end result is destined to be. The inevitable conclusion will be a scenario very similar to nuclear deterrence, but instead of using nuclear warheads to inflict damage, land use will be the means to inflict damage. Similarly, this deterrence based on land use is cyclically escalatory in nature, and there are little to no barriers preventing non-combatant casualties. AccoXXing to John Smith's XXme theory, this has the highest probability of resulting in a no win situation for all factions involved, and every participating entity will more than likely incur heavy losses in one way or another. This was from the beginning completely unnecessary and avoidable. No external source forced the antagonistic parties into action, especially in the unlawful and completely deplorable manner in which they acted. If they had simply concerned themselves with acting with integrity, severed themselves from greed and misdirected hate, no one would have been bothered and it would have been for the better.
This also could have been completely avoided by the county, as the county possesses the ability and duty to enforce the laws of the state of XXXXXXX, reXXXXless of the private citizens standing. Standing only affects one's ability to bring forth action in the court, it does not shed personal liability of officials, and especially it does not prevent the county from enforcing state law and the laws it legislated itself only a year or two ago. As protection and enforcement of the law is required by law. The offense is not aXXinst the people on the adjoining properties, but aXXinst the county as the leXXl representative body of the citizens of Lamar County for the state of XXXXXXX. The offenses of violating state law, are aXXinst the citizens of the state of XXXXXXX, who have invested obliXXtory authority to the county. If the county refuses to enforce the laws of the state, the county violates the trust invested in it by the state. Furthermore, none of this prevents perfectly leXXl retributionary action from occurring outside of the formal system of the courts.
Frankly, the current position of 'we are going to do whatever we want, disreXXXX state law, constitutional rights, and you can't do anything about it' is the worst stance for the county to take. As it completely decimates the integrity of the county, and portrays the county as corrupt, dictatorial, and authoritarian. It also establishes a dangerous precedent in the county as to what is seen as acceptable business practice, and leaves the county completely open to future accusations of corruption, favoritism, bias, and discrimination. Additionally, as much as people would like to believe their personal integrity is limitless and separate from the orXXnizational body in which they are a member of, nothing could be further from the truth. Subconsciously, the individual will always be associated and viewed as an extension of the orXXnizational entity in which they are a member of. Thus is the reason, by nature, accountability must be diligently enforced and upheld in orXXnizational bodies, because the actions of one affect the integrity of all.
It is needless to say, if the county's interests are to promote business investment in the community, then by refusing to enforce the law the county is directly in conflict with this interest. Obviously, any business owner would be considered foolish for investing in a region with a governing entity that is known to refuse to enforce its own law and repeatedly have disreXXXXed the investment made by residing citizens. The only businesses that would invest in a region with this questionable track recoXX are the types of businesses that are least desirable and whose lifespan is most volatile. This is because the corporate culture of those businesses are not invested in profitability in the long term, but rather fly-by-night schemes that revolve around consumer deception and circumvention of leXXl requirements. As their methods of achieving profitability rely upon the requirement to leave ruin in their wake for someone else to pay for. These methods are not community beneficial, they are community exploitive. The only group protected by the county's decision are the same people who violated the law to begin with. Literally, they are being rewaXXed for breaking the law, and using the county as a pawn.
The other thing that I do not understand is, what exactly do they expect us to do? Do they seriously think we are just going to sit here, not ask any questions, and accept we are being screwed over? Do they seriously think our attention span is so finite that we will forget what has been done to us anytime within the recent future? It seems that they never concerned themselves with reflection on the long term consequences, or what type of leXXcy it will leave behind.
Bill Linsey was the lawyer for the real estate sale between Doug and Matthew Dayton. He also was the Lawyer for Abernathy on numerous occasions, and attempted to represent both the county and Abernathy in the Solar issue. It is unknown exactly who, but it is highly likely leXXl counsel advised much of what has been done to us, and aided in the circumvention of both the law and accountability. We also have suspicions of being informally black listed on multiple fronts. As it is all routinely too convenient for coincidence.
XXXXXXX
:END: