Why is it even a federal building? Is it constitutional that they take over ranger land or even own state land outside of DC and military bases?
That probably isn’t “government surveillance” camera’s. It looks like an external sub-station in the background of at least one of the locations, the camera’s are ESP’s (electronic security perimeters). What they have probably done is stolen the power company’s equipment and that is actionable. Many, many electric companies have these installed at almost all their sub-stations for varying reasons.
The sign said: “Your Wildlife refuge”.
- people think of Oregon as this green, lush, and scenic state, and some of it is. But this area of the state most definitely is not. Desolate, and most certainly not picturesque. Having cattle, horses, or other animals grazing on those lands would actually be an improvement, as it would give one something to keep themselves entertained. This is not some sort of national treasure like Yosemite - the land should be in the hands of the people (ranchers) that owned it, not the Feds.
- while I think Pete Santilli is a bit of a blowhard (and a 9/11 Truther), he is providing a worthy service with his coverage of the "occupiers" and showing that they aren't wild-eyed individuals, which is what would happen if it was only the usual media suspects allowed to massage the message.
- compare the Occupy Wall Street bunch (who were occupying public land, as well) to the behavior of the guys at this shack in Oregon. The spoiled children in NYC were pooping on police cars and making a mess in general; the guys in Oregon have actually been fixing up a facility that was apparently in some disrepair (our tax dollars hard at work).
- last, it is beyond clear that the Feds are trying to drive the Hammonds off of their property. We should all be concerned about that, regardless of the probably misguided way that Bundy and Co. are trying to get people to focus on what is happening, not just in OR, but out West.