Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: annalex
and no activity he does contemplate is impeded by the oil exploration, then no right of his is violated by the Exxon drillers. That is why the intent is relevant.

Then you admit that the Exxon drillers must succumb to the land owners. The right to be left alone and leave the oil right where it is excludes meddling by Exxon or any other technology company or nation. You're arguing in circles.

If there's oil in a zit on my forehead, you would argue that Exxon could "peacefully extract" that oil as long as they didn't intend to violate my rights. After all I left it there as a big white-headed invitation for Exxon to come pop it and turn it into gasoline.

Horsehockey. It's their nation. It's their desert. And it's their oil. They can leave it in the ground if they wish. That's what I intend on my property and I have had offers to come and get it. Thankfully I secured the mineral rights. The oil stays there as long as I retain those rights.

62 posted on 10/15/2001 1:01:55 PM PDT by Demidog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies ]


To: Demidog
you admit that the Exxon drillers must succumb to the land owners.

The Exxon drillers must submit to the owners, yes -- I never argues otherwise. They don't have to submit to the government that happens to have the jurisdiction of unowned land.

63 posted on 10/15/2001 1:28:17 PM PDT by annalex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson