Posted on 01/03/2016 1:54:57 AM PST by Nachum
A group of militiamen on Saturday occupied the headquarters of a national wildlife refuge in Oregon in support of two brothers who are slated to report to prison on Monday on arson charges - and the protesters don't plan on leaving any time soon, saying it's 'kill or be killed' time.
Militia members claimed to have as many as 150 supporters with them at the Malheur National Wildlife refuge building in Princeton, which is federal property managed by the US Fish and Wildlife Service that was closed for the holiday weekend.
They later rescinded the number and said they would not disclose how many people were in the building, because of 'operational security'. Local reporters have said that there only appears to be a dozen cars outside of the building.
'We're planning on staying here for years, absolutely,' Ammon Bundy, one of the occupiers, told the Oregonian via telephone. ‘This is not a decision we've made at the last minute.'
Ammon Bundy and his brother Ryan, who is another occupier, are the sons of of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, who was involved in a 2014 standoff with the government over grazing rights.
The occupation came shortly after 300 marchers paraded through Burns, Oregon, about 50 miles away, to protest at the prosecution of father and son Harney County ranchers Dwight Hammond Jr and Steven Hammond, who were ordered returned to prison by a federal court which ruled their original sentences were insufficient.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Hence my 3 year old tagline, which was at least partly in jest in the beginning.
Kinda think I sorted it out a little.
I think there’s a tipping point, where OTrauma just starts going full-Stalin. I don’t think we are there yet, notice how delicately he’s treading on his gun control Executive Order tomorrow. It’s basically a tiny measure — proported to be background checks if the seller sells 25 guns a year — and he had his people research it for MONTHS before deciding to proceed.
Comes a time he won’t be so careful or delicate. That’s when we know the balloon went up.
That, or any grid-down scenario. Either of those.
This particular deal is just unwise.
the federal government and the BLM took control of the land by an act of Congress - in that act of Congress, the BLM is mandated to manage, maintain and improve the grazing land.
BLM rarely does a good job of this and they are very quick to threaten the permit holders with fines, permit reductions or revocation - and it is a source of considerable friction.
There has obviously been a great deal of friction for awhile in this case; there is no reporting about that - but some of us can figure out some of the reasons.
I thought of that too, why not tie up all loose ends?
Barring a miracle, this will play out. There is no way these guys are standing down.
The aftermath is what I’m really worried about.
“If I ran cattle on your land, and you agreed to maintain the perimeter fences - then you’d better do it.”
Were that in the lease agreement then I would say yes but! Two things tear up fences, one is fires and the second is cattle. Your cows tear up my fence and your paying for it! You are responsible for any damages including the misuse of fire. You run more cattle cattle than we agree on and you’re off the ranch. You tear up my pastures with vehicles or equipment you’re of the ranch. Basically I’m setting the rules and if you don’t like it take a hike.
So just a comment as an observer.
You state that you have no knowledge of how the BLM works as you have never dealt with them.
That statement makes you as unfit to comment on the actions of the BLM vs the Hammonds as I am.
So you might be less hung up on showing us how much you know.
The BLM is definitely out of control and needs to be shut down, but a second question that is just as important is:
Is this the right time to start a shootout with the feds?
It could cause obummer to use is executive order powers to seize both people and guns.
One of the rules of winning is to know when you can win and when you are suicidal.
“were ordered returned to prison by a federal court which ruled their original sentences were insufficient.”
I think that’s the point. They served their time IMO.
What I suspected.
Oh, so you know little or nothing about grazing permits???? Interesting. In your admitted ignorance, why don’t you ‘splain to me what it is I don’t know about what I’m saying??
You are a bit of an arrogant jerk....you made your money in oil - but you look down your nose at the guys who depend on these permits to make their ranches viable and tell them, “if you don’t like the terms, don’t take the lease”. And you say this while admitting that you know the feds are not to be trusted....sounds to me like you are the kind of neighbor that hopes for the other guy’s hardship, so you can buy up his land with your oil money. I’ve known several of your kind...
The whole point I have been making is that the feds are lying bastards (another way of saying they are not to be trusted). They give conflicting directives, change the deal, and generally make it difficult for the grazer. You prance in, defending the lying bastards, while telling me I don’t know what I’m talking about and the feds are not to be trusted. BRILLIANT!! In a formal debate, you would have just conceded my point, while proving I do indeed know EXACTLY what I’m talking about.
Don’t you think that lying bastard thing is at the heart of this whole thing? If the feds would be upfront and honest in dealing with the permit holders, and not treat them as adversaries, these situations wouldn’t happen.
Aren’t you the brilliant one??? Cattle tear up fences??? I.....did.....not......know.....that.
An agreement to maintain fences in a grazing lease kind of presupposes there will be cattle putting pressure on the fences, doesn’t it, sweetheart? So you would be tacitly agreeing to deal with that pressure, which negates your “your cattle tore up the fence” excuse. Is this another matter in which you’re ignorant, or does it just seem that way?
A sane voice of reason. Thank-you.
Not to get in the middle of an argument, but I just wanted to add something. This is an attitude that is prevalent across not only the bureaucrats but also leos and politicians ... that they are the masters of the public rather than servants of the public.
The degenerate queers on the Ninth Circuit and the DOJ have decided to teach Whitey a lesson.
The government signed off on the original sentences.
They now VIOLATE the 8th Amendment.
The lawlessness of the COMMUNIST PARTY in charge must be exposed.
That’s what this is all about.
Hammonds can not say they approve of this action, they are already under the jackboot.
Look for the Fed’s to come with EXTREME violence and quickly.
The longer this goes on, the more damage they incur and the more Americans wake up and become outraged.
Yup - which is why I figured the guy for a BLM employee or relative, but nope - he’s ex LEO
Your the reason people like me don’t lease out our land. You are a humorous little twit I will say that. Keep defending the criminal who was sucking on the government tit until it ran out. His grazing fee’s are nothing compared to private land grazing fee’s, let him pay 75 to 150 a head and listen to him cry. I have no sympathy for the felon your trying to defend. He started 2 fires, one to cover up a crime and the other while a burn ban was in place. He was convicted by a jury which included evidence from people that witnessed the crime. Now he’s trying to play victim, piss on him! The BLM angle is just to gather sympathy for this loser and you fell right into it.
I never heard of a lot of things happening by the Government before the muslim occupied the White House. all of them bad or shady.
It probably won’t. But at least they will go quickly.
Another Waco type mass murder in the wind? These guys need all the help they can get.
It is probably for the best.
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.