Posted on 01/03/2016 9:31:09 AM PST by Lazamataz
In the last day or so, a very dangerous situation has emerged in Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, near the town of Burns, Oregon. Ammon Bundy and about a dozen men, armed with firearms, have occupied a closed Federal building on that property. The local Sheriff has backed down, and there are rumors of Special Response Teams staging nearby.
This building is a smallish, very isolated building in the middle of a large National Refuge. Someone posted on a thread under a Guardian news article about this, "I'm in Oregon. These guys took over a headquarters building but it's kinda like an old brick house your grandma would live in and it's at least 50 miles from nowhere. You guys have a good time."
I do not intend to explore the minutia behind the case. That is a matter for courts. I do intend to explore the responses to this that we should take, and those we should not take.
I had a chance to hear a CNN interview with Ammon Bundy. At best, his narrative can only be described as incoherent. The CNN host, remarkably constrained in his questioning, asked what the government could do to unravel this. After a lot of "um's" and "uh's", the best Ammon could come up with was, "The government needs to start following the Constitution." The host wanted a more definitive answer, and Bundy had nothing. Simply put, this guy is the perfect foil for a police-state government move.
We all agree. The Federal government does need to start following the Constitution. This is a fight for the court system, and if there is no relief there -- AND it happens to more than a handful of us -- THEN other more drastic measures can be considered. The key is the universality of violation. The cases of Waco, Ruby Ridge, the Bundy Ranch -- while all eregious -- are spread apart by years and have happened to the tiniest percentage of people. The proper response to these actions are judicial in nature. Take these things all the way up to the Supreme Court. These venues NEED to be fully-explored, first.
If, however, this sort of government abuse begins to happen in greater and greater numbers, there comes a time when there is a tipping point. When OTrauma just starts going full-Stalin, we must react, or die on our knees.
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 -- purported 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.
There comes a time he won't be so careful or delicate. That's when we know the balloon went up. Either that, or if we ever awake to find that the electric or communications grid is down. Those are proper signs that something srastic must be undertaken.
If the Feds undertake an attacking action, and lose anyone, this will be the chance for OTrauma to actually impose some Stalinist directives. Anything from a declaration of a National Emergency to martial law could be reasonably taken, and the masses of people would go right along with it. See, the masses of people need to feel the boot before they will join. There must be more support by the general population before we can move. There are also several ways to conduct ourselves. One is more direct action, but another seems to be effective as well. Look at Czechoslovakia for how a successful 'velvet revolution' can occur, or how the 'Arab Spring' caused (admittedly harmful, in this instance) change. Anything where we are the vast minority, and a Fed-supportive populace is the vast majority, is simply a death sentence for more of our liberties, and perhaps even a death sentence for we who believe in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
This particular set of actions by Ammon Bundy are just unwise. One actually wonders if he wasn't emboldened or encouraged to act recklessly by agents of the administration, embedded in his group.
I call upon Ammon Bundy to stand down, and work the court system -- all the way up to SCOTUS -- at this time. I plead for all patriotic-minded individuals to stay away from this situation.
Greg Abbott has already said over his dead body on the red river grab.
(It'd take a large set to take on a stampeding bison with a club...)
I hear you, but I haven’t heard anything from him that says he’s going to shake up the media/business/government complex. And, why would he? He’s a well placed part of it. We’ll see.
I think I see the basis for the confusion. The Terrorism discussion comes in because the law was changed by the “ANTITERRORISM AND EFFECTIVE DEATH PENALTY ACT OF 1996” PL 104-132, 110 STAT. 1214. See Section 708 which established the minimum sentence that has given rise to the current consternation. Here’s a link for convenience and context
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-104publ132/html/PLAW-104publ132.htm
Thus, but for the Antiterrorism act, we wouldn’t be where we are today.
The libs go around protesting and revolting and they are cheered as heroes. We try to protect our lives and lands and families and we are described as nuts and FR is willing to just play into it.
That would be my guess. But at the end of the day, they made the higher charge stick.
Throw the book at someone so they will cave and waive any rights to save time/money?
Don't know the minds of the prosecutors here, but that is the common practice. As the folks in Waco may find out to their dismay, the government can't afford to take every case to trial.
When you get right down to it, a jury is only as good as its members.
Yes, and it is hard to get good people to sit for a jury pool. Particularly in federal cases that may run for weeks.
Laz... these people are not PR agents. They are farmers and people who worked the land for generations. I’m sorry you are embarrassed of them, but that doesn’t mean they are wrong.
Its not how I feel, Hildy. All my comments in FB better state how I feel. Permission to reprint?
It was amended, in terms perhaps of the sentencing, but it specifically excludes terrorism under 18 U.S.C. § 844(f)(1)
I disagree. There may come a time (and potentially soon) that people of good faith have to rise up. But this isn’t that time. I’m convinced that these people have been tricked down this path in order to give 0bama leverage to bring the hammer down on all American patriots. As such they become useful idiots - and are so because they can’t reason past their passion. The Hammonds asked those who came there to stand down. This group is trying to force their agenda on the Hammonds.
You have to pick your fights wisely - and this is the epitome of stupid. Wrong time, wrong place and wrong agenda.
Perhaps you should read the postings of respected patriot groups calling for them to stand down before you so quickly condemn the call of calmer heads.
Are we really sure the fire was advancing on their property and that the only thing that would save it was starting their own firebreak? There hasn't been a whole lot said about the Hammonds to date that's turned out to be true. The fire in question was being fought by professionals. I would have to think that if a firebreak was called for then they would have started one. And since a fire-ban was in effect then one would think that leaving back fires to the pros would be even more important.
Thanks Lurker, for the info!
Now what, Laz?
USSupreme ct didn’t grant certaori....
But no blood needs to be spilled in the near future. That will color us into the 'bad guys' when it should be the BLM.
The Hammonds look like a done deal. Nothing we can do for them. We must try to prevent more Hammonds in the future.
When you start thinking that everyone is against you, Free Republic *and* Obama, then you are probably the one in the wrong...akin to a crazy guy always thinking that everyone else is crazy (except him!).
In this case, Bundy is a registered Democrat and he’s done erratic and provocative things in the past. Now he’s gone to a different state (!) to occupy a bird-watching building on a federal reservation established by Teddy Roosevelt.
That...That’s your hill to die on?!
Good grief.
You’ve picked a silly fight, one that by luck or by design will fall precisely into Obama’s desire for national gun control.
Your “good intentions” could wipe out whatever freedoms we have left.
Unclever.
I gotta defend Hildy here. Hildy’s one of the good guys, Southy. She’s fed up to here with the BLM and her frustration shows.
Bloodshed, however, is not the answer, not yet. Not until a focus by Trump or Cruz on this situation and others like it yields NO results.
Why do you get to decide when it’s time for bloodshed?
Liz, I’m not downgrading the crap the alphabet agencies like the blm. I too have family being jerked around by them in Montana.
However, we have to look to a long view. Keep our powder dry for a real fight. This one has all the makings and markings of a set up. This only diverts from where our focus should be - casting the scum out of office in the revolution of Nov 2016.
Sorry for being uninformed, which I don't often think I am.
What's going on?
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.