Breaking Oregon Militia Occupies Federal Building

[yubba]

http://conservativetribune.com/militia-federal-facility-2/ 0945 someone had a chance to post Americans standing against government tyranny,, I ain't skreeert to do so ,,, I certainly enjoyed posting The Bundy Ranch thread acouple years back,,, and had a chance to watch the live feeds of what happened that day, I saw that tyranny tuck it's tail and leave, Seems as always The Bureau of Landmanagement is up to it's old tricks,,, either this story will get buried or The Commander en Cheif will come out with one of his best speeches ever,, how he needs to take away our guns, and about us domestic terrorist without a bunch of aaahs ,,mmmmhs ,oooohhs,anndds like he does when speaks about ISIL who the hell is ISIL I thought they called themselves isis,,,,you know something there wouldn't be any domestic terrorist ,, if you hadn't forgotten your oath of office to where you use the Constitution as Toilet paper.

[XabbaRus]

I was wondering how long it would take for this to appear here.

I thought I recognised the name of the family.

I've also read reports it is more like 15 people rather than a 150.

Storm in a teacup.

[Rockstar]

Shouldnt this go in the all purpose terrorism thread?

[Betonov]

Shouldnt this go in the all purpose terrorism thread?

Oberon beat him to it by about half hour. More or less.

[Rockstar]

Upon further reading.

After having read the case United States of America v. Dwight Lincoln Hammond, Jr., Steven Dwight Hammond. The current situation and actions by certain individuals and groups in Oregon. Their action does at the moment look much less than terrorism as defined by U.S. law and more like a 'protest' lead by an eccentric individual.

[Jimbuna]

Shouldnt this go in the all purpose terrorism thread?

I'm not convinced this is actually terrorism-related so we'll give the thread a chance.

[Platapus]

government tyranny?

I do not think that phrase means what you think it means.

[Betonov]

I'm not convinced this is actually terrorism-related so we'll give the thread a chance.

I agree, this is a redneck rebellion.

[Oberon]

government tyranny?

I do not think that phrase means what you think it means.

If anything, I think Yubba is rebelling against the tyranny of the English language. :hmmm:

[ikalugin]

Must be a sinister plan to take all the guns by using an agent provocateur.

[Oberon]

Must be a sinister plan to take all the guns by using an agent provocateur.

Don't give them ideas! :O: :/\\!!

[eddie]

I agree, this is a redneck rebellion.

:haha::haha:

[Subnuts]

Eh, it's absolutely nothing an A-10 firing 4,200 rounds per minute of 30x173 High Explosive Incendiary can't handle. The GAU-8 seems to use less ammo and is substantially more accurate than the majority of American police, too. :hmmm:

[Oberon]

The GAU-8 seems to use less ammo and is substantially more accurate than the majority of American police, too. :hmmm:

https://media.giphy.com/media/Ow59c0pwTPruU/giphy.gif

[Buddahaid]

I agree, this is a redneck rebellion.

YeeHawww! Yo is rat 'bout that'n.
https://secure.parksandresorts.wdpromedia.com/resize/mwImage/1/640/360/90/wdpromedia.disney.go.com/media/wdpro-assets/gallery/attractions/magic-kingdom/country-bear-jamboree/country-bear-jamboree-gallery02.jpg?07072014212252

[Rockstar]

I agree, this is a redneck rebellion.


:har:

[Oberon]

YeeHawww! Yo is rat 'bout that'n.


Does that make these people Yeehawdists? :hmmm:

[vienna]

Does that make these people Yeehawdists? :hmmm:

Oh, Good one!...


<O>

[Oberon]

Oh, Good one!...


<O>

Wish I could claim it as mine, but I saw it on Twitter as well as "Y'all Qaeda", "Vanilla ISIS" and "YokelHaram." :03:

[Oberon]

Now children are being brought into the site:
http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/oregon-militia-members-now-bringing-their-children-into-the-compound

Nothing like a little human shield to keep the FBI on its toes.

[XabbaRus]

Well from reading various reports it seems like the FBI and law enforcement are just leaving them to it. Apparently there are no federal employees at risk.

Maybe a good move, let them bleat and do their thing till the get bored and go home.

[Betonov]

Now children are being brought into the site:
http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/oregon-militia-members-now-bringing-their-children-into-the-compound

Nothing like a little human shield to keep the FBI on its toes.

This will work only against them.
It will bring the public agaisnt them and should the feds choose to wait it out, the nagging of a hungry, bored child is going to shorten the siege.

[Penguin]

Wish I could claim it as mine, but I saw it on Twitter as well as "Y'all Qaeda", "Vanilla ISIS" and "YokelHaram." :03:

:har:

Hey, I got another one: Peckerwood Liberation Organization.

[August]

This will work only against them.
It will bring the public agaisnt them and should the feds choose to wait it out, the nagging of a hungry, bored child is going to shorten the siege.

There is no siege. AFAIK the cops, let alone the Feds haven't even shown up to the location yet. People are coming and going freely, including the children you mention. Remember this is at some park lodge out in the middle of nowhere.

[Penguin]

There is no siege. AFAIK the cops, let alone the Feds haven't even shown up to the location yet. People are coming and going freely, including the children you mention. Remember this is at some park lodge out in the middle of nowhere.

:hmmm: Not sure about the coming and going freely; at least one reporter from the Guardian has been denied to enter the location: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/03/oregon-militia-threatens-showdown-with-us-agents-at-wildlife-refuge

Sounds like those "Constitutionalists" are not much into the First Amendment.

[Betonov]

There is no siege. AFAIK the cops, let alone the Feds haven't even shown up to the location yet. People are coming and going freely, including the children you mention. Remember this is at some park lodge out in the middle of nowhere.

Svašta

[August]

Svašta

I suppose it could, but so far one thing it's definitely not (at least so far) and that is terrorism.

[Oberon]

Not by the American law definition anyway.

[Betonov]

I suppose it could, but so far one thing it's definitely not (at least so far) and that is terrorism.

Svašta is our little word for anything between ''well, that's strange'' to ''what the hell''
Sometimes I revert to my native language when I can't find an english desription.

Yeah, it's not terrorism.
But it can take a turn for the worse. Especially if the YallQaida decides they want more attention.

[August]

Not by the American law definition anyway.

Whose definition would?

[Oberon]

The first definition on Google gives me:

terrorism
ˈtɛrərɪzəm/
noun
noun: terrorism
the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.


Now, the Bundy bunch haven't used violence...yet...but by carrying firearms into a federal office and occupying it, one could definitely make the argument that they are using intimidation. In fact if you were to ask them if they wanted to intimidate the federal government they would probably reply in the affirmative.
Are their aims political? Definitely.
Therefore one could make the arguement that they are unofficially using intimidation in the pursuit of a political aim.

Honestly though, right now, I would probably withdraw the claim of terrorism, but it is very close to it. If one of those men fires on an American federal agent then it becomes a 'federal crime of terrorism' under the definition of 18 U.S.C. § 2332b:


Is calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct; and
Is a violation of one of several listed statutes, including § 930(c) (relating to killing or attempted killing during an attack on a federal facility with a dangerous weapon); and § 1114 (relating to killing or attempted killing of officers and employees of the U.S.).



What they are guilty of, at the moment, as per US code 2384 is seditious conspiracy, or:


If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than twenty years, or both.


Either which way it was a stupid move, but Bundys group are rather...zealous in their beliefs and they've been given a lot of leeway by US authorities, some might say too much leeway.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

Whose definition would?Saudi Arabia's. Looks like any critique of government will suffice. No violence required.

[Oberon]

Meanwhile in Taiwan:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbjo0MVIxHg

[vienna]

In jest, there is some truth...



<O>

[em2nought]

Does that make these people Yeehawdists? :hmmm:

That's the funniest thing I've read this year. You democrat panzies do come up with some good ones. :D

[Schroeder]

That's the funniest thing I've read this year. You democrat panzies do come up with some good ones. :D
Considering it's just the 4th day of the year that doesn't say much. ;)

[August]

Therefore one could make the arguement that they are unofficially using intimidation in the pursuit of a political aim.

Which is still not terrorism. Why don't you just admit that you were a little too eager to pursue your usual political aim of belittling those on the other side of the political spectrum. In fact your constant attempts at doing so is a kind of intimidation so you might be considered an "almost terrorist" too.

Honestly though, right now, I would probably withdraw the claim of terrorism, but it is very close to it.So which is it, are you withdrawing your claim or are you not?

If one of those men fires on an American federal agent then it becomes a 'federal crime of terrorism' under the definition of 18 U.S.C.And if one of their aunts suddenly sprouts testicles she'll meet the definition of an uncle but that doesn't make it any more likely to happen no matter how much you hope it does.

[Platapus]

Does anyone know what these knuckleheads want?

I think it is unreasonable for them to expect the government to release the Hammonds. They seemed to have been given a fair trial (for both the 2001 and 2006 arson events) and it was reviewed by the court of appeals.

So what do they hope to accomplish?

How do they think this will end?



http://www.justice.gov/usao-or/pr/eastern-oregon-ranchers-convicted-arson-resentenced-five-years-prison


Despite repeated publications that the Hammonds were convicted under an anti-terrorism law, they were, in fact convicted under18 U.S.C. § 844(f)(1)



Subsection f was amended under an anti-terriorism law to add the minimum 5 year sentence. But amended by does not equate to convicted under.


Of course parties sympathetic to the Hammond case and or unsympathetic to the government would never deliberately miss-cite the law in order to get people emotionally spun up. That would be wrong.

[Torplexed]

Does anyone know what these knuckleheads want?



I don't think it's really about the Hammonds. The Bundys and their buddies believe that federal land should belong solely to the states or the ranchers themselves since the ranchers have grazed their cattle on it for so many generations. Section 8 of the Constitution gives the federal government sway over land in the nation’s capital, but nowhere else. If you believe that any power not granted to the federal government belongs to the states, then I suppose the Bundys are correct. However, the federal government has owned land outside the capital pretty much since 1790, when Alexander Hamilton convinced the states to give up land west of the Appalachians in exchange for federal assumptions of state debt. A few years later, Thomas Jefferson himself questioned the constitutionality of the Louisiana Purchase even as he wrangled the Senate to approve it.

It's possible that is what Bundy and his ilk think they are doing. Just as tree sitters raised public awareness of issues related to old-growth forests in the 1980s, maybe these guys see their occupation of a closed Fish & Wildlife Service building as their way to raise public awareness of alleged federal overreach on land control. Seems a few centuries late though.

The underlying problem with this tactic is that nowadays 90 percent of western US residents are urban dwellers who are much more likely to sympathize with spotted owls and sandhill cranes than with cattle and sheep.

[Oberon]

Which is still not terrorism. Why don't you just admit that you were a little too eager to pursue your usual political aim of belittling those on the other side of the political spectrum. In fact your constant attempts at doing so is a kind of intimidation so you might be considered an "almost terrorist" too.

So which is it, are you withdrawing your claim or are you not?

And if one of their aunts suddenly sprouts testicles she'll meet the definition of an uncle but that doesn't make it any more likely to happen no matter how much you hope it does.

Sweet, I'm an almost terrorist. :yeah: I can add that to the list, the Liberal Communist Political Correct Almost-Terrorist. I think it'll go well on the CV. :yep:
Truth be told, sometimes there's not much belittling needed, I mean these guys are clowns, no two ways about it, and far from helping their objective, they are actively undermining it, in a manner similar to how Trump is actively torpedoing the Republican party. You think I'm tarring all right wing folks with the same brush? I tend not to, but I do point at the crazies, because they do tend to pop up a lot. Do I think all right wing people are like the Bundys? Heck no, just as I hope that you don't think that I'm like Joseph Stalin....if anything I'm more like Gorbachev in my beliefs, and that would get me lynched by most Russians. :O:
I've met a Stalinist, on another forum I once frequented which had a rather high communist to capitalist ratio. My head still hurts when I think about this guy, he believed the Holodomor was lies and propaganda put forward by Ukrainian kulaks and the west. It was quite literally like meeting a holocaust denier only it was a different massacre. On that forum I was actually more center-right than anything else.
On this, I'm left, and sure this does colour my vision somewhat, I may perhaps sometimes skip over some left-wing nutjob to gape in horror at a right-wing one. They're both still nutjobs and I won't ever wind myself agreeing with either, but I'll focus on the right wing one because that personifies the greater alarm to my political subconscious.
It's not something I'm proud of, but it is human nature, and besides August, if I didn't do this, who else on this forum would? Who would there be left to balance the fear of Islam out with some good old fashioned homebrew extremism? Most of the others have left now. If there isn't some attempt at balance, to address all sides of the spectrum of extremism and indeed, terrorism, then there runs the risk of a pure focus on hating one particular group of people, and I don't think that that is healthy for what is supposed to be a forum for all people.

But yes, I do withdraw my classification of this as an act of terror, but if the circumstances change, if indeed your aunt does grow a testicle and becomes your uncle, then I will reserve the right to reclassify this incident as such.

[Oberon]

Considering it's just the 4th day of the year that doesn't say much. ;)

Can I be a democrat panzy tank, perhaps? :hmmm:

[em2nought]

Can I be a democrat panzy tank, perhaps? :hmmm:
Wish granted http://s3-origin-images.politico.com/2013/11/01/dukakis_tank_2_c.jpg

[Oberon]

:har::har::har::har:

Brilliant! :up:

[nikimcbee]

I don't think it's really about the Hammonds. The Bundys and their buddies believe that federal land should belong solely to the states or the ranchers themselves since the ranchers have grazed their cattle on it for so many generations. Section 8 of the Constitution gives the federal government sway over land in the nation’s capital, but nowhere else. If you believe that any power not granted to the federal government belongs to the states, then I suppose the Bundys are correct. However, the federal government has owned land outside the capital pretty much since 1790, when Alexander Hamilton convinced the states to give up land west of the Appalachians in exchange for federal assumptions of state debt. A few years later, Thomas Jefferson himself questioned the constitutionality of the Louisiana Purchase even as he wrangled the Senate to approve it.

It's possible that is what Bundy and his ilk think they are doing. Just as tree sitters raised public awareness of issues related to old-growth forests in the 1980s, maybe these guys see their occupation of a closed Fish & Wildlife Service building as their way to raise public awareness of alleged federal overreach on land control. Seems a few centuries late though.

The underlying problem with this tactic is that nowadays 90 percent of western US residents are urban dwellers who are much more likely to sympathize with spotted owls and sandhill cranes than with cattle and sheep.


I'm going to go with this answer. Bundy is a religious fruit loop, looking for attention. I'm not even paying attention to it and I live here. Meh. This is the red neck version of greenpeace. Go do you protest and enjoy the freezing rain.

[Oberon]

I'm going to go with this answer. Bundy is a religious fruit loop, looking for attention. I'm not even paying attention to it and I live here. Meh. This is the red neck version of greenpeace. Go do you protest and enjoy the freezing rain.

Aye, we all have our fruit loops. I'm a tree-hugger but some of the stuff that Greenpeace and PETA get up to makes me facepalm big time.
I just hope that these rednecks do not live up to the stereotype and exercise firearm discipline if the federal agencies do take action.

Of course, the Feds could just not take action and wait for the news to get bored of Bundy, that would be a logical course of action, but I dunno whether Bundys group would move on once the mainstream media stops watching, or whether they will try to set up some kind of Mecca for the Minutemen like they seem to want to. :hmmm:

[nikimcbee]

So I had to look up some of the basic details for the story. This Bundy guy seems to be the white version of Al Sharpton. The second Bundy's group showed up, the press should have packed up and left.

Burns OR is out in the middle of the desert, the middle of nowhere...so....meh. Protest all you want.

[nikimcbee]

Here's details on the story/back story.

http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2015/12/ranchers_fight_with_feds_spark.html

[Rockstar]

Bundy is holed up in a place thats very cold isolated and nobody cares. They have very little support for their actions other than maybe a few locals and those directly involved. But if you read whats being said here Bundy's group is Superfly TNT, a mushroom cloud waiting to happen holding the country hostage with WMD's while barbecuing babies for lunch.

The story is, there is no story.

[August]

Bundy is holed up in a place thats very cold isolated and nobody cares. They have very little support for their actions other than maybe a few locals and those directly involved. But if you read whats being said here Bundy's group is Superfly TNT, a mushroom cloud waiting to happen holding the country hostage with WMD's while barbecuing babies for lunch.

The story is, there is no story.

The forum pundits have eagerly declared this to be terrorism because that is what they hope it to be.

I wonder now that the government has tossed out the plea bargain and sent the Hammonds back to jail whether that BLM purchase option on their ranch has become null and void as well.

[Cybermat47]

They're a bunch of idiots who are willing to commit crimes to defend arsonists, they've made it quite clear that they're willing to kill and die over this, and they're scaring innocent civilians. I wouldn't lose any sleep if all the adults wound up dead.

[August]

They're a bunch of idiots who are willing to commit crimes to defend arsonists, they've made it quite clear that they're willing to kill and die over this, and they're scaring innocent civilians. I wouldn't lose any sleep if all the adults wound up dead.

So are you actually saying that you don't care if the Feds shoot them down like dogs just for occupying a remote and uninhabited building? Maybe the Ranchers have a point after all if you're an example of the pro government side of this dispute.

[Dowly]

Does anyone know what these knuckleheads want?

To release the Hammonds (not going to happen) and have Feds give back the lands to the public (not going to happen).

Basically, they could be asking for an unicorn.

[Cybermat47]

So are you actually saying that you don't care if the Feds shoot them down like dogs just for occupying a remote and uninhabited building? Maybe the Ranchers have a point after all if you're an example of the pro government side of this dispute.

Okay, I did overreact. Sorry about that.

I don't have any problem with them protesting. But when they move in there with guns, and post videos to YouTube about being willing to kill and die to defend the rights of two arsonists, I honestly can't say that they're doing a good thing. But yes, they should be taken alive.

If being in Cadets taught me one thing, it's that we have rules for a reason. And these people are breaking laws for no justifiable reason. If the Government was marching people off the land and killing anyone who didn't go, then this reaction would be justified. As it is, two arsonists are being jailed for 5 years. I'd say that the protests were as far as anyone needed to go.

I hated the government that was in power in Australia a couple of months ago. It was a government that moved Australia backwards, cut the Defence Force's pay for no reason, got rid of gay marriage after just a few days of it being legal, and had a terrible immigration policy that led to Australia being labeled as racist.

But that's still no reason for me to have gotten a gun, upload threatening videos to YouTube, and taken over a government building. Especially seeing as that governemnt was soon to be replaced... just like the government these people are upset with. The Obama government literally only has a few more months before becoming a footnote in the history books.

And there is absolutely nothing that justifies them putting their kids there. Frankly, that just screams 'Human shields' to me.

Frankly, I just want this situation over. And as I mentioned earlier, I overreacted in my previous post. Now that I've calmed down, I just want this thing over peacefully.

[Dowly]

Apparently, this is their supply room:
https://twitter.com/amandapeacher/status/683741037207007232/photo/1

Love the comments. :haha:

@Cybermat47: I agree that society got rules for a reason, spot on.

As for their video and the statements of dying for their cause, their officials stance is that they will defend themselves, IF they come under attack. My concern is, if there are any of those Sovereign Citizen nuts among them who might take this as an opportunity to do something stupid.

[Cybermat47]

Apparently, this is their supply room:
https://twitter.com/amandapeacher/status/683741037207007232/photo/1

Love the comments. :haha:

Oh, that's easily going to last them years :har: :haha:

[Betonov]

if they got their prorities right they have a few days worth of food and a Waterloo battle worth of ammo.

[Oberon]

Okay, I did overreact. Sorry about that.

I don't have any problem with them protesting. But when they move in there with guns, and post videos to YouTube about being willing to kill and die to defend the rights of two arsonists, I honestly can't say that they're doing a good thing. But yes, they should be taken alive.

If being in Cadets taught me one thing, it's that we have rules for a reason. And these people are breaking laws for no justifiable reason. If the Government was marching people off the land and killing anyone who didn't go, then this reaction would be justified. As it is, two arsonists are being jailed for 5 years. I'd say that the protests were as far as anyone needed to go.

I hated the government that was in power in Australia a couple of months ago. It was a government that moved Australia backwards, cut the Defence Force's pay for no reason, got rid of gay marriage after just a few days of it being legal, and had a terrible immigration policy that led to Australia being labeled as racist.

But that's still no reason for me to have gotten a gun, upload threatening videos to YouTube, and taken over a government building. Especially seeing as that governemnt was soon to be replaced... just like the government these people are upset with. The Obama government literally only has a few more months before becoming a footnote in the history books.

And there is absolutely nothing that justifies them putting their kids there. Frankly, that just screams 'Human shields' to me.

Frankly, I just want this situation over. And as I mentioned earlier, I overreacted in my previous post. Now that I've calmed down, I just want this thing over peacefully.

The difference between the US and...well...most other nations in the world is that the US has a distinct distrust of authority of any kind. I think it dates back to the revolution where the British authorities abused their power to levy excess tax upon the colonials.
So where other nations have a slight form of trust with the government, most Americans don't and in fact they see government as a challenge to their civil liberties and baulk at any attempt by the government, be it local or national, to extend its powers or take over anything.
Obviously not every American is as reactionary as the Bundy bunch, they're not likely to take up arms, not unless the government really does overreach itself, but they will in some instances sympathise with the sentiment of the Bundys, that the government has no right to do x, y or z. Most of the time this sentiment just expresses itself in voting Republican who always vow to fight 'big government', but of late there's been a split in the Republican party between those who think that the Republicans aren't doing enough to defend American rights against the big government and those who are part of the traditional Republican group, it's a sort of a demand to remove the career politicians from the Republican party and restore it to what these people believe is the proper grass-roots. Of course, other people believe that these people are extremists and that they're derailing the party, and both sides have spent the last two US elections both fighting the election and fighting each other. I think that this is one of the reasons that Trump has been so popular with a certain part of the Republican electorate, he's not part of the political machine, he's an outsider and he's not PC, he speaks his mind, no matter who it offends. To a certain set of people that's an appealing thing, but there's no telling how much damage it's doing to the Republican partys standing in the US and in the world.

Of course, such a thing is not restricted to the US, history has shown us that in times of economic crisis, people turn away from the usual political parties and go to the extremes, left and right. Take Poland for example, recently voted in some rather questionable people who are now trying to take apart its constitution, and Greece, people like Syrizas would have been laughed out of Athens twenty years ago, and few would have dreamed that the neo-Nazi Golden Dawn would be the third largest party in the country.
This can lead to...problems, one only has to look at Europe in the late 1920s to see how much of a problem it can lead to. One can only hope that we've learnt enough from history to avoid such things.

But getting back to the subject at hand, it's difficult for non-Americans to understand Americans, especially Americans like Bundy who have an almost paranoid fear of the American government. You can perhaps ponder if Bundy has any idea what a real tyrannical government is like, and if he had tried something like this in the PRC or DPRK whether he'd still have his Doritos...but equally, one could say that people like Bundy are there to make sure the US government doesn't become like the PRC or DPRK, by fighting each step of Washington attempts to take and keep power.

In short, there are no easy answers, there never have been, and that's why we are where we are.

At least, that's how this limey sees it. :03:

[Bilge_Rat]

"arsonist" is a strong word. I don't expect city slickers to understand, but using fire to manage grazing lands is a widely recognized technique:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110328115430.htm

https://www.business.qld.gov.au/industry/agriculture/crop-growing/grazing-and-pasture-management/managing-with-fire/when-to-use

https://www.firescience.gov/projects/briefs/06-S-01_FSBrief37.pdf

even on public land used by ranchers:

http://esrd.alberta.ca/lands-forests/grazing-range-management/range-stewardship.aspx

I could understand a fine or even the original sentence imposed by the court, but a five year mandatory sentence without the possibility of parole (federal time) is way over the top. Looking at the back story on the case, it really looks like the DoJ wanted to make an example of these men.

[Rockstar]

I suppose 5 years in the Federal Pen. might sound kind of harsh for simply working the ranch. But he did go to court, evidence was presented which persuaded the jury to find Hammond and his son guilty of arson. One may want to consider then there's more to the case than a innocent rancher just trying to manage some land.

[Oberon]

I think using fire for any kind of large scale agricultural purpose is just asking for trouble. It's far too easy for a fire to spread out of control, just ask California.

[Bilge_Rat]

a lot of things about this case are off:

1. I have not found a single case of a farmer in "socialist" canada being sent to jail for burning grazing land;

2. the original fire was supposedly set to cover up the "illegal slaughter of deer". Trouble is no one ever gets sent to jail for illegally poaching deer out of season, most you get is a fine;

3. the "arson" burned 127 acres of "federal" land which sounds like a lot, but is actually a square 2400 x 2400 feet or about 2/10th of a square mile which is minuscule out there. The Hammond's ranch is over 12,000 acres.

more details here:



(i) In the early fall of 2001, Steven Hammond (Son) called the fire department, informing them that he was going to be performing a routine prescribed burn on their ranch. Later that day he started a prescribed fire on their private property. The fire went onto public land and burned 127 acres of grass. The Hammonds put the fire out themselves. There was no communication about the burn from the federal government to the Hammonds at that time. Prescribed fires are a common method that Native Americans and ranchers have used in the area to increase the health & productivity of the land for many centuries.

(j) In 2006 a massive lightning storm started multiple fires that joined together inflaming the countryside. To prevent the fire from destroying their winter range and possibly their home, Steven Hammond (Son) started a backfire on their private property. The backfire was successful in putting out the lightning fires that had covered thousands of acres within a short period of time. The backfire saved much of the range and vegetation needed to feed the cattle through the winter. Steven’s mother, Susan Hammond said: “The backfire worked perfectly, it put out the fire, saved the range and possibly our home”.


(j1) The next day federal agents went to the Harney County Sheriff's office and filled a police report making accusation against Dwight and Steven Hammond for starting the backfire. A few days after the backfire a Range-Con from the Burns District BLM office asked Steven if he would meet him in town (Frenchglen) for coffee. Steven accepted. When leaving he was arrested by the Harney County Sheriff Dave Glerup and BLM Ranger Orr. Sheriff Glerup then ordered him to go to the ranch and bring back his father. Both Dwight and Steven were booked and on multiple Oregon State charges. The Harney County District Attorney reviewed the accusation, evidence and charges, and determined that the accusations against Dwight & Steven Hammond did not warrant prosecution and dropped all the charges.

(k) In 2011, 5 years after the police report was taken, the U.S. Attorney Office accused Dwight and Steven Hammond of completely different charges, they accused them of being “Terrorist” under the Federal Antiterrorism Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. This act carries a minimum sentence of five years in prison and a maximum sentence of death.



http://bundyranch.blogspot.ca/2015/11/facts-events-in-hammond-case.html

[Cybermat47]

"arsonist" is a strong word. I don't expect city slickers to understand, but using fire to manage grazing lands is a widely recognized technique:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110328115430.htm

https://www.business.qld.gov.au/industry/agriculture/crop-growing/grazing-and-pasture-management/managing-with-fire/when-to-use

https://www.firescience.gov/projects/briefs/06-S-01_FSBrief37.pdf

even on public land used by ranchers:

http://esrd.alberta.ca/lands-forests/grazing-range-management/range-stewardship.aspx

I could understand a fine or even the original sentence imposed by the court, but a five year mandatory sentence without the possibility of parole (federal time) is way over the top. Looking at the back story on the case, it really looks like the DoJ wanted to make an example of these men.

I'm well aware of what backburning is, I've spent plenty of time learning about farming. But this looks more like they started a fire to cover up their poaching. That, and in the later one, they knowingly endangered the lives of several firefighters, which is an absolutely disgusting thing to do.

Dwight and Steve Hammond were convicted of arson by their peers in 2012 for setting fires on federal land adjacent to their property near Burns in 2001 and 2006.mIn 2001, according to Probation Officer Robb, hunters in the area witnessed the Hammonds illegally shooting deer and shortly afterwards a fire forced them to leave the area. Later, Steve's nephew Dusty Hammond testified that his uncle told him to start lighting matches and "light the whole countryside on fire." Dusty also testified that he was "almost burned up in the fire" and had to flee for his life and was later abused by Steve. The Hammonds have said they started the fire to stop invasive plants from growing onto their grazing fields. The 2006 fire was an illegal backburn set under the cover of night knowing beforehand that a firefighting camp was on the slopes above. According to the indictment, the fire threatened to trap four BLM firefighters, one of whom later confronted Dwight Hammond at the fire scene after having moved his crews to avoid the threat.

Sources: https://popehat.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/HammondGovBrief.pdf

http://landrights.org/or/Hammond/Transcript%20of%20Judges%20ruling.pdf

http://www.opb.org/news/article/hammond_witness_describes_setting_fire_in_2001/

And of course, there's one fairly obvious question; if it was just backburning, why didn't the Hammonds tell anyone on the neighbouring land? :hmmm:

[Mr Quatro]

I say let the protesters freeze ...

The FBI should sit in nice warm offices and send in the photo drones (without arming them). If they shoot at a drone their crusing for a brusing. :o

[Bilge_Rat]

The Oregon Farm Bureau supports the Hammonds:


Elderly Harney County rancher Dwight Hammond and his son, Steven (pictured at left, and a former OFB board member and Harney County Farm Bureau president) were convicted in 2010 for two fires they set in an effort to protect their ranch. The fires, one in 2001 and one in 2006, left their private land and burned less than 140 acres, combined, of BLM land.

BLM and the U.S. Dept. of Justice prosecuted the Hammonds under charges subject to the 1996 Anti-Terrorism & Effective Death Penalty Act. The government used a kitchen-sink strategy, charging them with 19 counts. They were not found guilty of any charges, except for the two fires, which they admitted setting. For their sentence, both served federal prison time (Steven over a year, Dwight three months), and together they paid over $400,000 in restitution and fines to the federal government. They made mistakes, broke the law, had a fair trial, and paid their debt to society.

Now, the federal government plans to send them back to prison because the presiding judge in the case refused to give the Hammonds the mandatory minimum five-year sentence under the terrorism act. After the original trial, Judge Michael Hogan said the crimes the Hammonds were convicted for “could not have been conduct intended under (the terrorism law).” He said five years of jail time “would result in a sentence which is grossly disproportionate to the severity of the offenses here…” and would “shock the conscience.” This is the judge who presided over the entire trial and knew every fact of the case.

Despite the judge’s protest, the feds appealed the Hammonds’ sentences and won in the 9th circuit court of appeals. The Supreme Court declined to take the case after that loss. Later this month, the district court will be compelled to resentence both Hammonds using the minimums, unless BLM and DOJ agree to grant the Hammonds some leniency.

There is no debate about whether the Hammonds broke the law. A jury found that they did. However, OFB believes BLM is guilty of abhorrent overreach in insisting the Hammonds be tried using charges subject to terrorism laws and be sent back to federal prison.

This prosecution will have a chilling effect across the West among ranchers and others who rely on federal allotments and permits. It will harm the positive relationship many ranchers and organizations have worked to forge with the bureau, and the hard work that has been done on the range.

It also is hypocritical given BLM’s own harm to the range, which goes without consequence. It is unjust. OFB worked quietly behind the scenes with BLM through the spring and summer. That diligent diplomatic effort was fruitless.

Now it’s time to expose BLM’s mismanagement and overreach to the light of public scrutiny. You can do two things to help.



http://www.oregonfb.org/2015/10/05/sign-petition-savethehammonds/

about the OFB:


The state’s largest general farm organization, Oregon Farm Bureau (OFB) is a grassroots, nonpartisan, nonprofit organization representing the interests of the state’s farmers and ranchers in the public and policymaking arenas. First established in Oregon in 1919, Farm Bureau is organized in all 36 counties and has 7,000 member families that are professionally engaged in agriculture.

[Cybermat47]

I agree that trying them under terrorism laws is wrong, but the Militia is trying to solve it in the worst way possible. There are a lot of options available that aren't nearly as extreme as an armed occupation of a government facility.

[Oberon]

AFAIK the Hammonds didn't even want Bundys support in the first place, they just gatecrashed the protest and are using it to further their own agenda.

[vienna]

... Why don't you just admit that you were a little too eager to pursue your usual political aim of belittling those on the other side of the political spectrum. In fact your constant attempts at doing so is a kind of intimidation so you might be considered an "almost terrorist" too.

Have you now taken to talking to yourself? :haha:

Pots and kettles, sir, pots and kettles...



<O>

[Platapus]

Well there is that accusation of poaching unfortunately, the accidental fire nicely destroyed the evidence. I hope the witnesses are being protected.

But in any case, we need to avoid anything like Ruby Ridge/Waco. I like the way the government is handling it. We are not going in guns a blazin' like a cowboy movie.

Let's hope it can end peaceably. The last thing we need to do is raise another domestic terrorist like McVeigh over this.

The government's goal should be to deescalate this event.

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

I think using fire for any kind of large scale agricultural purpose is just asking for trouble. It's far too easy for a fire to spread out of control, just ask California.It has been used for (atleast) centuries with not too much trouble... and still is in Russia (couple of years ago winds blew smoke to Finnish side of border, all the way to Central Finland).

If you are dumb enough to use it on places dry like a dust (California has major drought problem, hasn't it?) then you really deserve what you get.

[eddie]

Even other militia leaders don't agree with what they are doing!

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-oregon-militia-allies-idUSKBN0UJ04120160105

[Torplexed]

If one wants a precedent for a peaceful end, back in 1969 a native American group occupied the then abandoned penitentiary at Alcatraz for 19 months.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_Alcatraz

By late May, the government had cut off all electrical power and all telephone service to the island. In June, a fire of disputed origin destroyed numerous buildings on the island. Left without power, fresh water, and in the face of diminishing public support and sympathy, the number of occupiers began to dwindle. On June 11, 1971, a large force of government officers removed the remaining 15 people from the island.
The power has already been cut at the far chillier Malheur Wildlife Refuge. I guess we'll see if history rhymes.

[Oberon]

It has been used for (atleast) centuries with not too much trouble... and still is in Russia (couple of years ago winds blew smoke to Finnish side of border, all the way to Central Finland).

If you are dumb enough to use it on places dry like a dust (California has major drought problem, hasn't it?) then you really deserve what you get.

Well, true, I guess it depends on the landscape and the climate. A place like Oregon you could probably get away with it, but of course, how do you stop a fire from spreading beyond your land?
It does seem rather OTT the sentencing, and I can understand the protest that took place in the town, but the Bundys hitching up their anti-government agenda to it really hasn't helped the Hammonds at all. If anything it's probably made their chances worse.

[Rockstar]

It has been used for (atleast) centuries with not too much trouble... and still is in Russia (couple of years ago winds blew smoke to Finnish side of border, all the way to Central Finland).

If you are dumb enough to use it on places dry like a dust (California has major drought problem, hasn't it?) then you really deserve what you get.

One way or another it's going to happen. Either humans do it in a controlled manner. Or mother nature will with a lighting strike and that usually ends up catching everyone off guard.

[August]

At least, that's how this limey sees it. :03:

I'd say it's a pretty accurate assessment. :up:

[vienna]

If one wants a precedent for a peaceful end, back in 1969 a native American group occupied the then abandoned penitentiary at Alcatraz for 19 months.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupation_of_Alcatraz

The power has already been cut at the far chillier Malheur Wildlife Refuge. I guess we'll see if history rhymes.

Heard a news report on the local CBS radio affiliate some of the militia members are starting to gripe about the whole mess because they have lives to get back to, jobs, etc., and they don't seem to share the sentiments of an occupation 'till the end' of the Bundy's and they, unlike the Bundy's, don't have monetary support coming in from supporters elsewhere. Also, the locals, many, if not most, of whom either work for the various government agencies or have businesses dependent on government interaction are making rumblings about not cooperating with the occupiers by refusing to sell them food or other items they may need or want. It looks as if the wheels are starting to come off...


<O>

[Oberon]

Heard a news report on the local CBS radio affiliate some of the militia members are starting to gripe about the whole mess because they have lives to get back to, jobs, etc., and they don't seem to share the sentiments of an occupation 'till the end' of the Bundy's and they, unlike the Bundy's, don't have monetary support coming in from supporters elsewhere. Also, the locals, many, if not most, of whom either work for the various government agencies or have businesses dependent on government interaction are making rumblings about not cooperating with the occupiers by refusing to sell them food or other items they may need or want. It looks as if the wheels are starting to come off...


<O>

The nuts do definitely seem to be coming loose...

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/01/oregon-militants-brawl-as-friends-beg-them-to-go-home-youre-surrounded-by-informants/

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/07/oregon-residents-say-its-time-for-the-militia-to-pack-it-up-and-go

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3387117/Stolen-valor-Militiaman-bodyguard-ranchers-Cliven-Ammon-Bundy-posing-retired-Marine-served-Afghanistan-Iraq-boost-combat-credentials.html

http://www.breakingburgh.com/enraged-birders-to-retake-oregon-wildlife-refuge-in-dawn-offensive/ :03:

[vienna]

Yep, drunkenly brawling amongst themselves, threatening death to the families of public public officials, lying about their "achievements", these are truly the cream of the American crop and a true asset to the American way of life and its values. Why, we should all be very proud they carry our flag... :nope:

Brings to mind another group of great Americans who also strove to impose their "ideals" by armed confrontation; hell, they even made a fuss about their right to bear arms:


http://morallowground.com/wp-content/themes/volt/scripts/timthumb.php?src=http://morallowground.com/wp-content/uploads/Black-Panthers-guns-e1380641817598.png&w=780&h=339&zc=1&q=100


(Black Panther Party on the steps of the Washington State Capitol, 1969)...

Aside from the color, not a lot of difference...



<O>

[August]

Some right wing terrorists these chumps turned out to be! :haha:

[Oberon]

Some right wing terrorists these chumps turned out to be! :haha:

I want my money back! :nope:

[Buddahaid]

I want my money back! :nope:

Come an' get it.
https://annettehoffman.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/5762143286_7c2913e191_z.jpg

[August]

10 points to anyone who can name those people without looking it up. :)

[razark]

Would it be Ma and Pa Kettle?

[Buddahaid]

Would it be Ma and Pa Kettle?

It would be. :yeah:

[Platapus]

Technically it would be Marjorie Main and Percy Kilbride. :D

[razark]

Technically it would be Marjorie Main and Percy Kilbride. :D
Hey, I thought I did pretty good for a wild guess.

[vienna]

...and Ma and Pa Kettle would be more rational and effective than that Oregon militia lot...


<O>

[August]

Would it be Ma and Pa Kettle?


10 Points! :know:

[Kptlt. Neuerburg]

So now this has happened. I don't think anything is going to happen with this, to me it shows partly how desperate ISIS is and like the Bundy bunch would really take advice from a muslim. On the other hand it's begining to look like the occupiers are at least to some degree prevoke a responce of some kind from the Feds. Hopefully cooler heads will prevail and this standoff doesn't become another Waco or Ruby Ridge
On Saturday, militants drove government-owned vehicles and heavy equipment around the compound, saying the trucks and backhoes now belong to the local community. They also covered the national refuge sign with a new sign saying: "Harney County Resource Center" in white block letters over a blue background. http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/more-armed-men-visit-site-of-oregon-wildlife-refuge-standoff/ar-CCkymi?li=BBnb7Kz

Supporters of the Islamic State terrorist group are urging American sympathizers to try to instigate more anti-government demonstrations like last week’s armed takeover of a federal building in rural eastern Oregon.
A Twitter posting addressed to members of the Islamic State community describes the ongoing occupation by armed rancher Ammon Bundy and his fellow activists as a “key opportunity,” and suggests that Islamists should do what they can to help them. http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/islamic-state-tries-to-use-oregon-takeover-to-turn-americans-against-their-government/ar-CCkF6B?li=BBnb7Kz

[Buddahaid]

It gets more pathetic daily. :har:

[Platapus]

So are the people who are leaving the government building being arrested?

[Kptlt. Neuerburg]

So are the people who are leaving the government building being arrested? I haven't heard of anyone being arrested yet because nobody has left, or if they had it hasn't been reported on. On the contrary more people have started to show up to support the occupation. I would think that one of the charges if any of the protesters where to be arrested would be breaking and entering, there will no doubt be a slew of other charges but breaking and entering would be the main one.

[Buddahaid]

Don't these people have jobs or do they live off the state?

[Torplexed]

Don't these people have jobs or do they live off the state?

Apparently, some of these militiamen have reportedly been spotted eating at area restaurants during the standoff.

Talk about roughing it. From Valley Forge to Valley Gorge.

[Buddahaid]

Apparently, some of these militiamen have reportedly been spotted eating at area restaurants during the standoff.

Talk about roughing it. From Valley Forge to Valley Gorge.

That explains why they wanted their women to join them. They're getting tired of canned chile and cheetos.

[nikimcbee]

The press is doing this all wrong.
http://cdn.inquisitr.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/cliven-bundy-oregon-standoff-snacks.png

The press needs to push the "religious motives". They (the media) could troll these clowns all day on that subject alone. Leave the real Constitutional issues to someone more competent.

[nikimcbee]

I'll just leave this here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7M0mG6HUyk#t=75

Have fun.:up:

Every time he says "I had a feeling", take a drink.

Every time he says "I know what the Lord was feeling." Take a drink.

[Aktungbby]

The press is doing this all wrong.
http://cdn.inquisitr.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/cliven-bundy-oregon-standoff-snacks.png



I'll just leave this here.


Have fun.:up:


Every time he says "I know what the Lord was feeling." Take a drink.
OH Katchin up with the LORD's Army in Oregon now are we!??
just Htoo (Johnny and Luther)http://static01.nyt.com/images/2013/11/03/world/twins2/twins2-articleLarge.jpg they think they're kidding up in Oregon!

[Platapus]

Don't these people have jobs or do they live off the state?

There are some who are living off the public assistance run by the very government they claim to hate. Now that's hypocrisy. :nope:

[Platapus]

I read that a Judge is wanting to fine these Yall-Qaedas about $70,000 to help re-emburse the expenses the state has run up due to their tantrum.

Maybe these Wallmartyers can pay their fines off with sex toys. :D

[August]

I read that a Judge is wanting to fine these Yall-Qaedas about $70,000 to help re-emburse the expenses the state has run up due to their tantrum.

What expenses? AFAIK the only cop that's been dispatched throughout this whole farce was a county sheriff.

[Platapus]

What expenses? AFAIK the only cop that's been dispatched throughout this whole farce was a county sheriff.

It is my understanding that there are state and federal agents on that site also.

[Betonov]

What expenses? AFAIK the only cop that's been dispatched throughout this whole farce was a county sheriff.

Rent for sleeping in a federal building.

[Oberon]

Maybe they can pay their rent in dildos?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/oregon-militia-gag-gifts-dildos-article-1.2495329

[Torplexed]

Maybe they can pay their rent in dildos?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/oregon-militia-gag-gifts-dildos-article-1.2495329

The first ever Dickstarter campaign? :huh:

[Jimbuna]

The first ever Dickstarter campaign? :huh:

LOL :)

[Buddahaid]

No it isn't. There have been countless dickstarter campaigns throughout history without end, or happy ending.

[Platapus]

Just as a ribbon has become a widely used symbol for support, I think we as a nation should adopt the "box o' dicks" as a symbol of ridicule.

The best thing we can do against these nutters is ridicule them. It drives them crazy

"But but but you have to take us seriously!!!':wah::wah:

"Sure, here is your "box o' dicks" now go home". :D:D

[Armistead]

I think for them to do time sentenced and released, for only a judge to say they didn't meet the min sentence requirement is a joke.

[August]

It is my understanding that there are state and federal agents on that site also.

Whatever one may think of these bozo's this was still a political protest. Of course they should pay for any damage they do to the place but maybe forcing them to pay for the governments over reaction should be seen as a tax upon free speech.

[Platapus]

Whatever one may think of these bozo's this was still a political protest. Of course they should pay for any damage they do to the place but maybe forcing them to pay for the governments over reaction should be seen as a tax upon free speech.

I think it is going to be a moot point as

1. They ain't got no money
2. They don't pay the bills they already have levied against them.

So yeah, it is futile.

[Oberon]

Well, surely they've got charges of B&E, trespass and possibly seditious conspiracy sitting on file ready to be put towards them whenever the local law enforcement feel like it.

[August]

Well, surely they've got charges of B&E, trespass and possibly seditious conspiracy sitting on file ready to be put towards them whenever the local law enforcement feel like it.

The first two for sure but the last only if the government wants to turn them into martyrs for the very thing that they're protesting. Now i'm sure that with all the undercover FBI agents who have infiltrated their encampment any such treasonous talk will have been documented and reported but unless it's egregious I doubt that they would pursue it. We'll see though. One can't overestimate the governments capacity for stupidity.

[Oberon]

The first two for sure but the last only if the government wants to turn them into martyrs for the very thing that they're protesting. Now i'm sure that with all the undercover FBI agents who have infiltrated their encampment any such treasonous talk will have been documented and reported but unless it's egregious I doubt that they would pursue it. We'll see though. One can't overestimate the governments capacity for stupidity.

True, it would be best to let the last one slide, and just hope that the abject failure of this uprising discourages any other such couch militia from trying a stunt like it. At least this time it was in the middle of nowhere and an empty building, last thing the US needs is another McVeigh being encouraged.

But, that being said, it's election year this year, and I dare say if Bernie gets in then there'll be all kinds of angry talk, same with Hillary really.
And I wouldn't be at all surprised if Cruz or Trump gets in if someone on the left did something stupid too. Polarisation breeds radicalisation. :dead:

[August]

True, it would be best to let the last one slide, and just hope that the abject failure of this uprising discourages any other such couch militia from trying a stunt like it. At least this time it was in the middle of nowhere and an empty building, last thing the US needs is another McVeigh being encouraged.


When you think about it the governments response isn't all that much different than the way they treated the Occupy movement a few years ago. Who knows, maybe the Feds actually learned something after Waco and Ruby Ridge.

[Oberon]

When you think about it the governments response isn't all that much different than the way they treated the Occupy movement a few years ago. Who knows, maybe the Feds actually learned something after Waco and Ruby Ridge.

We can only hope. Sadly, I suspect it won't be long before we have an answer. :hmmm:

[Kptlt. Neuerburg]

We can only hope. Sadly, I suspect it won't be long before we have an answer. :hmmm: Well here's an answer of sorts. The Guardian


The standoff with armed militia in Oregon escalated on Friday after police swooped in on one of the protesters to make the first arrest in connection with the two-week occupation of a federal wildlife refuge.
Kenneth Medenbach, who was arrested for unauthorized use of a government vehicle, is a chainsaw sculptor and longtime nemesis of the government with a history of previous entanglements with the courts over the occupation of federal lands.
He is the first militiaman connected to the armed occupation to be arrested since the bird sanctuary in rural Oregon was unexpectedly taken over on 2 January.
Medenbach, 62, was detained outside a Safeway supermarket in Burns, Oregon, some 30 miles from the Malheur national wildlife refuge, according to a statement from the Harney County sheriff’s office. Source: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/oregon-militia-standoff-man-arrested-driving-stolen-government-vehicle/ar-BBog1m8?li=BBnb7Kz

[August]

Driving a stolen government plated van 60 miles away from the stand off. He was asking to be arrested.

[razark]

Oh yeah. This is still happening.

Federal authorities arrested Ammon Bundy, the leader of a group of protesters occupying a federal wildlife refuge in Oregon, and several of his followers in a traffic stop Tuesday, a law enforcement official told CNN.
Shots were fired after authorities made the stop, the source said. It's not clear who fired first.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/26/us/oregon-wildlife-refuge-siege-arrests/index.html

[Oberon]

Allegedly someone was also killed during the operation. At least that's what the Beebs breaking news is saying.

A pity that this happened, I guess someone's patience ran out.

EDIT: Seems as though it happened at an FBI traffic stop, shots were fired and one of the 'Yallqaeda' members was killed. It's unknown who fired first.

[Torplexed]

The locals have been some putting pressure on law enforcement for some days now to end this wing-ding circus. Looks like it worked.

They fought the law and the law won.

[Aktungbby]

They fought the law and the law won.

A bit of a CLASH at that!:D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16u0wwCfoJ4 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16u0wwCfoJ4)! (sorry I couldn't resist!l):shucks:

[Oberon]

Just read that the chap that was shot had eleven kids!

And they talk about Muslims breeding to take over the world. :doh:

[Buddahaid]

Terrible but not unexpected after all. Christ, eleven kids? These people live in the old world so it must be God's will then.

[Kptlt. Neuerburg]

The Washington Post
Federal agents moved early Wednesday morning to seal off a remote wildlife refuge in Oregon, hours after authorities arrested several leaders of the armed activists who had seized the land in a shootout that killed one of the group’s most prominent members.
In the weeks since the group began its occupation, local and federal law enforcement officials had called for the occupation to end peacefully. On Tuesday, after these calls and attempts at negotiations went nowhere, authorities moved to arrest several group members while they were away from the compound. A total of eight people were arrested, at the shootout and other locations.
After the exchange of gunfire on a highway, Ammon Bundy, the group’s leader, and others were arrested on federal charges. Other members of the group remained at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, but before the sun rose over a remote swath of eastern Oregon previously best known for its bird-watching, authorities said they were blocking access to the federal land. http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/authorities-seal-off-oregon-refuge-after-leaders-of-occupation-arrested-1-killed-in-gunfire/ar-BBoKxtX?li=BBnb7Kz

[Platapus]

Just read that the chap that was shot had eleven kids!...


I wonder how much government support he was getting?

[Torplexed]

Interesting development in this story. All the defendants were acquitted in Portland, Oregon today.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37795012

I guess it's open season on federal land and armed insurrection. :o

[em2nought]

Interesting development in this story. All the defendants were acquitted in Portland, Oregon today.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37795012



Great! Just in time for them to vote! :up:

[Oberon]

Great! Just in time for them to vote! :up:

http://cdn.historynet.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/633x284xBattleOfCorinth.jpg.pagespeed.ic.D4sD0AZNC G.jpg
Artists impression of polling stations on the 8th November.

[Mr Quatro]

Interesting development in this story. All the defendants were acquitted in Portland, Oregon today.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37795012

I guess it's open season on federal land and armed insurrection. :o

Oregon is Oregon ... they won't even let you pump your own gas ... an attendant has to come out and do it.

Oregon does things their way :yep:

[Rockstar]

interesting, not sure but maybe jury nullification came into play in this case. Also too the fat lady hasnt started singing yet, I heard Nevada want a piece of them next.

[MaDef]

While i tend to be Law & order kind of guy, I also grew up west of Colorado Springs where the Pike National forest was my back yard. Over the years I've watched the feds "administer" federal lands out here in the western U.S. and I pretty much have to agree with the Bundy's on this one, the State and local governments should be the ones to administer those lands. I find it hard to believe that politicians & bureaucrats residing in a city 2500 miles away really understand the land.

[Platapus]

interesting, not sure but maybe jury nullification came into play in this case. Also too the fat lady hasnt started singing yet, I heard Nevada want a piece of them next.


I think it is a case of jury nullification and i am against that.

[MaDef]

I think it is a case of jury nullification and i am against that.why Is it Jury nullification? Isn't more likely the Gov. over charged, and then didn't meet the burden of proof required?

[Platapus]

why Is it Jury nullification? Isn't more likely the Gov. over charged, and then didn't meet the burden of proof required?


It would be nice if we had all the facts of the case. It does not sound like they were over charged and does seem to be ample evidence that they did what they did. It was on the new for many days.

I hope it was not a case of jury nullification. That can be a terrible thing that can further undermine the confidence in our justice system (which has been strained recently).

[MaDef]

I hope it was not a case of jury nullification. That can be a terrible thing that can further undermine the confidence in our justice system (which has been strained recently). Really? Jury nullification has been around since the inception of the United States and is an integral part of our justice system. To Quote Chief Justice John Jay:

"It may not be amiss, here, Gentlemen, to remind you of the good old rule, that on questions of fact, it is the province of the jury, on questions of law, it is the province of the court to decide. But it must be observed that by the same law, which recognizes this reasonable distribution of jurisdiction, you have nevertheless a right to take upon yourselves to judge of both, and to determine the law as well as the fact in controversy. On this, and on every other occasion, however, we have no doubt, you will pay that respect, which is due to the opinion of the court: For, as on the one hand, it is presumed, that juries are the best judges of facts; it is, on the other hand, presumbable, that the court are the best judges of the law. But still both objects are lawfully, within your power of decision."

[Platapus]

It is a contentious issue that's for sure. I just have personal dislike for it as it can be abused and there is no oversight. But that's just my own opinion.

[August]

I think the lack of oversight is the whole point. A free people must never give up their right to self determination and that extends to the freedom to judge their peers as they see fit.

[MaDef]

It is a contentious issue that's for sure. I just have personal dislike for it as it can be abused and there is no oversight. But that's just my own opinion. I'm not sure I understand the abuse part?

As for oversight, I think jury nullification is actually the citizens way to oversee the justice system. Case in point: the 18th amendment was repealed partially due to 60% of prosecutions involving alcohol being nullified.

[Platapus]

I'm not sure I understand the abuse part?

As for oversight, I think jury nullification is actually the citizens way to oversee the justice system. Case in point: the 18th amendment was repealed partially due to 60% of prosecutions involving alcohol being nullified.

A fair question.

When most people think of jury nullification, it is in the context of the jury acquitting a defendant who is technically guilty of violating the law, but the jury feels that the law is either unjust or the law is being applied unfairly in this case. That's all well and good and many think it is a noble cause. But that is only one side of Jury Nullification.

Jury Nullification can also be represented when the jury convicts a defendant who is technically not guilty of violating the law, but the jury thinks the defendant is "getting off on a technicality" or the jury feels that an example needs to be made of the defendant.

Consider this example: you are on trial for shooting an intruder and your claim is self defense. Suppose the jury feels that there have been too many instances of people shooting people and claiming self defense and that "something has to be done about it" and chose to use you as an example and votes to convict. That is also a form of jury nullification, albeit a less common form.

It is commonly stated that jury nullification as a venue of sending a message to the judiciary or the prosecution about potentially unjust laws. However, this is only true if the judiciary or the prosecution knows the reason for the acquittal/conviction. A jury does not render their verdict by stating "your honor, we find the defendant not guilty because we are invoking our right of jury nullification". No. The jury renders their verdict by stating "we find the defendant not guilty".

The judiciary and prosecution does not know if the jury means

1. That the defendant is truly not guilty
2. That the prosecution was unsuccessful in proving the guilt of the defendant
3. That the jury feels that the law is unjust
4. That the jury feels that the law is being applied unfairly

Since the rational of the jury is not questioned, there is no message that can be used to change laws. Petitioning the legislation would be a better way of getting laws changed.

Then there is the lack of oversight. There is a real risk of discrimination in the decision of jury nullification. A jury may decide to acquit a white woman by invoking jury nullification, but another jury may convict a black man for the very same crime.

How can the judiciary ensure that citizens are treated fairly if juries have the uncontrolled and unsupervised ability to, at their whim, selectively apply the same law to different people.

The whole purpose of law is that all the citizens know what to do and not do.

How can a jury of laypeople determine if a law is unjust? What you are getting are some people's opinion whether a law is unjust, which is not the same thing as the law actually being unjust.

A law really can't be unjust if it is considered unjust in one situation but considered just in other situations.

If a law is unjust, the law needs to be changed, not arbitrarily nullified.
If the law is just but being implemented unfairly, there is the appeal process.

In theory, jury nullification sounds like a great idea. But the reality does not sound good in my opinion. Allowing 12 randomly selected people to decide (emotionally?) to selectively apply the law, to me, is a bad idea.

[Torplexed]

I always thought the conspiracy charge was a stretch but how can they possibly be found not guilty of the weapons charges when there is hours of video footage of them toting guns on federal property? :hmmm:

[Platapus]

I always thought the conspiracy charge was a stretch but how can they possibly be found not guilty of the weapons charges when there is hours of video footage of them toting guns on federal property? :hmmm:

Two words which we have already discussed. :(

[MaDef]

I always thought the conspiracy charge was a stretch but how can they possibly be found not guilty of the weapons charges when there is hours of video footage of them toting guns on federal property? :hmmm: Damn that pesky second amendment.

If you want to know why this kind of thing happens, look at a map sometime, the Federal Gov, owns 75-80% of the land between the Eastern slope of the Rockies and the Pacific Ocean, including mineral, water & grazing rights. The Guys that make the rules live 2500 miles to the east of that land. Is the issue now starting to come into focus a little?

[Takeda Shingen]

Imagine if they had been unarmed Native Americans instead of heavily armed white men. They'd probably be dead.

[Oberon]

Imagine if they had been unarmed Native Americans instead of heavily armed white men. They'd probably be dead.

There'd have been at least ten Abrams, four Apaches (and not the kind that they'd be used to) and a couple of hundred heavily armed infantry surrounding the place. Easily. :yeah:

[Rockstar]

Granted I don't know much of the particulars concerning this case. But privately owned firearms are allowed in the National Parks just not in the buildings

[yubba]

Funny thing the government didn't want to build the Keystone pipeline,,, apparently there wasn't enough Indians in the way.

[August]

Imagine if they had been unarmed Native Americans instead of heavily armed white men. They'd probably be dead.

http://dailycaller.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/turn-in-your-arms-e1367434593681.jpg

[August]

So apparently this was not a case of jury nullification (sorry Platapus! :)) but rather the governments use of agent provocateurs.

The discovery that Killman was an FBI informant hit just before the surprising outcome of the trial of seven refuge occupiers. (http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2016/09/oregon_standoff_trial_the_key.html) The revelation may have sounded the death knell for a struggling prosecution, now faced with more questions about how informants may have influenced the case.

http://www.oregonlive.com/oregon-standoff/2016/11/who_was_john_killman_a_tip_and.html#incart_2box

[August]

Indictment handed down.

FBI Agent Charged With Lying About His Role In Shooting An Activist During Oregon Wildlife Standoff

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/pictures/picture-5.jpg (http://www.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden)
by Tyler Durden (http://www.zerohedge.com/users/tyler-durden)
Jun 29, 2017 12:42 PM


0
SHARES



A grand jury in Portland, Oregon has charged FBI Agent W Joseph Astarita with three counts of making false statements, alleging that he lied when he claimed he did not fire his weapon during the attempted arrest of LaVoy Finicum, a key figure in the Oregon militia standoff at the Malheur national wildlife refuge in 2016.
Astarita, who pleaded not guilty in federal court in Portland, was assigned to arrest the leaders of the Oregon standoff in January 2016 when Finicum drove off the road and into a snowbank, before attempting to flee on foot. During the ensuing confrontation, some of which was captured on film, Oregon state police officers shot and killed Finicum, an Arizona rancher, who police say was reaching for his gun. Police later said the shooting was “justified”.
Here is the press release from the United States Attorney's Office (https://www.justice.gov/usao-or/pr/fbi-special-agent-indicted-making-false-statements-and-obstruction-justice):


The indictment alleges that Astarita knowingly and willfully made false statements to FBI Supervisory Special Agents, knowing that the statements were false and material to the FBI’s decision not to investigate the propriety of an agent-involved shooting. Specifically, Astarita falsely stated he had not fired his weapon during the attempted arrest of Mr. Finicum when he knew he had in fact fired his weapon. Astarita also knowingly engaged in misleading conduct toward Oregon State Police officers by failing to disclose that he had fired two rounds during the attempted arrest.

Astarita was arraigned on June 28, 2017, in Portland. He entered pleas of not guilty to each county and was released pending future appearances.

An indictment is only an accusation of a crime, and a defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
For those who missed it, a portion of Finicum's confrontation with police was caught on film and clearly shows that the first shots were fired while his hands were up in the air...'ironically', no pop stars made a "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" video after this incident.