Posted on 01/05/2017 3:59:33 AM PST by Nextrush
BURNS--A knock on the front door awakened Susie Hammond....
She struggled out of bed, hobbled by an aching right hip, and limped to the front of her small house.....
"Susan?" one of them said. "My name is Ammon Bundy."
So began Hammond's passage from 75-year-old matriarch of an eastern Oregon ranching clan to reluctant symbol of the rural West's revolt against federal ownership of vast resource-rich rangeland.
Bundy often invoked the story of Hammond's husband, Dwight Jr. and their youngest son Steven, convicted of setting fires on public lands and ordered back to prison to serve out five-year sentences.....
Susie Hammond wasn't equally enamored of Ammon Bundy.
Her family didn't invite the attention and didn't want it, she said in her first extensive interview since Bundy launched his surprise occupation on Jan. 2....
But over the past year, Susie Hammond has changed. She's come to appreciate Bundy's stand and populist politicking.... his family's fight over cattle grazing rights in Nevada has parallels to her own family's conflict. She's tracked Bundy's arrest, trial and acquittal.......
The men, used to the wide open spaces of the high desert, live in a barracks-style building and share a bunk.....
"It's just cement and razor wire. I went down once. I'm not going again. I can't do anything about it," Susie Hammond said, her voice trailing off. "I just have to hope that the good Lord will keep them safe."
She paused, then added, "I think Dwight thinks his working life is over.".....
.. Rusty Hammond supported the Bundys from the start.....He was called as a witness by the Bundy defense at the trial, testifying that his father was threatened by the government for his contact with Ammon Bundy.
"Without the Bundys and their bunch," Rusty Hammond said, 'you wouldn't know the name of Hammond.".....
(Excerpt) Read more at oregonlive.com ...
It inlcudes an interview with Susie Hammond, whose husband and youngest son sit in a federal prison serving five year terrorist sentences for lighting a backfire to protect their land.
There's a lot more in the story than I excerpted about the Hammonds and their views about the Oregon Standoff protest and the Bundy Family.
The plight of the Hammonds brought Ammon Bundy to eastern Oregon to stage the protest.
The Hammond’s should have sold drugs, then Obama would have pardoned them./s
President Trump should pardon the imprisoned two.
BLM should be disbanded. It serves no legitimate purpose.
Actually the BLM keeps track and administers the vast western land holdings of the US Government. Your statement is without basis nor merit.
The feds want this land to rewild it per agenda 21.
If nothing happens, We the People should not let this go quietly into the night.
As with the murdered Arizona Rancher, something must be done to bring justice for his life being taken from the ambush.
Yep.
Actually since the Federal Government is not allowed to own any land within a State but for that necessary for Forts, Ports, and other needful buildings BLM had no Constitutional authority to be there in the first place.
“to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings” US Const. Art 1 Section 8, Para 17.
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html
And no Inside a State is not a Territory.
“Actually the BLM keeps track and administers the vast western land holdings of the US Government.”
Sounds like something two guys with a pick-up, cell phone, and a list of approved contractors could do. And yes...I own a farm...so I know what’s involved.
Your statement is typical of a tyrannical bureaucrat defending his right to surf the internet for porn on taxpayer funded jobs.
Article IV, Section 3 says otherwise.
Here bert, let me say what the other responders were too kind to say.....Shuddup you useless tool, you’re dumber than a bag of rocks!!
I realize that, but I don’t believe the federal government should be the owner of vast swathes of western lands. Yes, as long as they do, they need a BLM. That is the problem that I would like to see resolved.
I have traveled extensively several times over vast areas of BLM managed land in Utah including much of the recently declared as a National Monument. Generally it is extremely undesirable. It is however amazingly beautiful
We like to recite history in terms of people and events but in fact US History is the tale of what happened to the land. If the land controlled by the BLM was worth a damn, it would be private. The fact it is not is testimony to the lack of worth. I acknowledge some BLM land is leased for grazing and perhaps other uses but bottom line is that if it had any value it would be private.
I would cite a little known series of events that began simultaneously with the founding of the nation that illustrates the keen interest in the founders in the acquisition and disposition of private lands. I will not argue what is constitutionally legal vs what is. What is ..... is
For reference:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Grant_Deed
Actually the BLM keeps track and administers the vast western land holdings of the US Government. Your statement is without basis nor merit.
———————————————#—#######
YOU ARE CORRECT...the BLM is also virtually self supporting and has been mission oriented, though that is changing as the WH brings in more USFS, NPS and USF&W people who enjoy devoting time and money to silly stuff rather than the people’s business. From what I have been told, the Army Corps of Engineers likewise has morphed into PC sycophants from a mission oriented, professional organization.
No, they don't. The feds TOOK this land because of the mineral resources (uranium) that are underground. They sold the uranium rights to Russian investors, and then had to find a way to get the ranch owners OFF the land.
Obama recently declared a HUGE parcel of Nevada land as a NATIONAL MONUMENT. Guess who's ranch is part of that land ?
-—and has been mission oriented-—
The question of mission and perhaps bureaucratic turf was raised when Bubba declared the Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument in Utah to be administered by the BLM rather than the National Park Service I was very surprised by the bureaucratic slight of hand.
The NPS was prepared with programs and people to see to the needs of visitors. The BLM was not, it had to learn. Although recent trips to the area show the BLM has advanced up the learning curve, it is not up to NPS standards for taking care of the needs of visitors. Needs include not only facilities in the form of visitor centers but in availability of information. The area is vast. The questions are many.
Actually the federal government owned the land long before uranium became a valuable commodity.
Obama recently declared a HUGE parcel of Nevada land as a NATIONAL MONUMENT. Guess who's ranch is part of that land ?
Nobodies. It was all land owned by the federal government. Bundy's ranch happens to be nearby.
That article you cite refers to Territories. A State is not a Territory. The LAW I cited refers land inside States.
See the discussions of the territory of Puerto Rico becoming a State to see the difference.
Once its a State the land is owned by the State and the Federal Govt is required to purchase it from the State with the consent of the State for the limited purposes as stated in Art 1. Your argument nullifies the specific language of this section and thus has no merit.
You know you're not the first person to latch on to this theory. Many have tried and the Supreme Court has shot them down on every occasion. There is nothing illegal about government owning land in a state.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.