Posted on 01/03/2016 4:13:57 PM PST by Kaslin
There’s a lot going on as regards the standoff in Oregon involving three of Cliven Bundy’s sons and the federal government. Jazz has already offered his opinion on the matter, and I mostly agree with him. But I’m not sure the term “armed troops†is appropriate to describe Bundy’s group because that suggests they’re in tactical gear. That doesn’t appear to be true based off what Ammon Bundy’s video posted on Facebook.
Standing for the rights of men & womenBREAKING! SHARE! Standing for the rights of Men & Women. Calling all freedom loving people to come to Harney County Oregon, come to the Malhuer Wildlife Refuge. The people are finally getting some good use out of a federal facility.
Posted by Bundy Ranch on Saturday, January 2, 2016
He repeated the comments to CNN this morning, calling his group "concerned citizens" who are acting to make sure ranchers have land for their children. It makes sense for Bundy to be concerned about ranchland, given what’s been going on with his father, but his methods are questionable because of how it can be spun in the media. The group showed foresight in taking over a remote, empty facility, but the way it’s being portrayed publicly is different. The Oregonian certainly seems to be ramping up the rhetoric against Bundy’s group (emphasis mine).
Among those joining Bundy in the occupation are Ryan Payne, U.S. Army veteran, and Blaine Cooper. Payne has claimed to have helped organize militia snipers to target federal agents in a standoff last year in Nevada. He told one news organization the federal agents would have been killed had they made the wrong move.
He has been a steady presence in Burns in recent weeks, questioning people who were critical of the militia’s presence. He typically had a holstered sidearm as he moved around the community.
The problem is The Oregonian is overblowing what Payne actually told Missoula Independent about what the “militia snipers” were doing during the Bundy Ranch situation last year.
“We locked them down,” Payne says. “We had counter-sniper positions on their sniper positions. We had at least one guy—sometimes two guys—per BLM agent in there. So, it was a complete tactical superiority. … If they made one wrong move, every single BLM agent in that camp would’ve died.”
That’s a lot different than the vague term "federal agents," and suggests Payne was just making sure his men could beat the Bureau of Land Management if it came to that. It’s also possible Payne was just bragging to puff up his own self-image, as BLM denied using snipers. But it’s ridiculous for The Oregonian to not provide better context to Payne’s statements. It’s also foolish to emphasize the fact Payne was armed whenever he talked to people. This may be a bit of a shock to the Left, but Oregon is an open carry state so Payne can carry a handgun without a problem. It doesn’t appear he was walking up to people, showing the gun and yelling, "WHO DO YOU SUPPORT?" but just carrying the gun for protection. It probably seemed odd to some people, but to others in rural Oregon it may not have been an issue. One thing which is an issue is the fact people in Burns don’t want Bundy’s group there. Bob Owens at BearingArms.com has a piece pointing this out, and how it could end up hurting more than helping.
These militiamen seem to be forgetting a key fact: a force opposing government only has a measure of philosophical legitimacy if the people want their support. In this instance, the Hammonds simply want to turn themselves on Monday and finish serving their time.
These militiamen need to stop attempting to hijack the Hammond case in an attempt to stay relevant, and let Dwight and Steven Hammond peacefully turn themselves in and finish serving their time.
So what happens if Bundy’s group decides to stick around and won’t leave the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge? Hopefully, not violence. This is where authorities need to show patience, and not do anything which ends up endangering the lives of anyone. Bundy’s group isn’t hurting people, and, at worst, is guilty of trespassing. Yes, they’re armed but that doesn’t mean SWAT needs to go rolling into the refuge or a drone be used to end the standoff. That would be the worst thing to happen, and bring back memories of Waco and Ruby Ridge. Federal and local authorities will just have to wait out Ammon Bundy and the rest of the occupiers, until they decide to leave. It may take a while, but it’s well worth it if no lives are lost. Bundy’s group needs to go, but having it happen through a haze of gun smoke and bodies is a bad idea.
A plant from the government will fire the first shot at the police. Just sayin’....
If the government can take years to help Veterans, then they can take years to work through this peacefully.
Their supposedly "Constitutional" theory about their "right" to claim land they do not own is laughable.
Anyone who thinks this is a hill to die on is a mark.
IT IS NOT FEDERAL LAND.
They have the wrong skin color.
Yep, just like in Waco and Ruby Ridge.
The same hate-filled trolls who infested the comments sections during the Bundy ranch incident are showing up again in the comments sections in the MSM articles/sites on this one. Sometimes they are even saying exactly the same thing. Such as calling the ranchers who lease federal lands ‘welfare queens’ and other identical phrasing. Odd. Who hires them?
There is a desperate need to investigate the BLM and its land deals, among other things.
Maybe this will bring attention to them. During the Bundy standoff one real estate agent had a YouTube video concerning his researches -— he was just looking for land to buy/sell. He found one ten-acre piece in the middle of the desert -— no structures on it, no water -— that the BLM bought for $700,000 from some business entity that he then could not trace.
So if ‘Occupy’ could get all that happy admiring coverage, why not these guys?
Never mind.
Yes, actually it is. Denying it - even in all caps - doesn’t change the fact.
Neither should have Waco...
Go back to sleep.
The Constitution is pretty clear. The Feds were never supposed to maintain control of lands or structures beyond those that are necessary for them to perform the functions enumerated in the Constitution. READ THE FEDERALIST. Control of land is ABSOLUTE CONTROL. Jurisdiction is POWER. Central power is exactly what the Constitution was trying to PREVENT.
The problem is that the feds control far too much land.
In the case of federal lands, the feds themselves are the welfare queens who hold land that produces no revenue. If the land were in private hands it might be productive in the sense that it produces revenue.
Unfortunately, a lot of people believe the news media, Hildy.
I think slime bucket Ron Wyden is behind these false news reports.
He, Merkley and the Gov. governor need to go.
Actually, it is not because its mere existence as de facto Federal lands without a need to fulfill Constitutional duties is clearly unlawful. The patriots in Nevada and Oregon are doing a great service by focusing national attention on this seldom considered issue.
As long as the Feds maintain a tight perimeter, most of these guys will get very tired of playacting as frontiersmen after a few weeks.
A political solution is preferable and there is at least one candidate for president who wants to sell off these BLM lands or turn them back over to the states.
Depends on who is better at handling snake bites and giant spiders.
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.