Those Darn Bundys At It Again!

[L'Emmerdeur]

The feds will eventually move on them and kill most of them. Dickheads.

That's exactly what at least one of them wants to happen. "‘I didn’t come here to shoot, I came here to die’: Oregon militia occupiers fess up to local reporters" | Raw Story

[piscator]

#needsnacks

http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/o ... ZJglh9sRjx


Anyone got any hummus in the frige? Tabbouleh? Just drop it in the mail...

Ammon Bundy
General Delivery
Burns, Or 97720 USA



Build a fence around them and send Cliven the bill. This shit will end as soon as they run out of Holy Martyr Copenhagen and Sacred Honor Doritos.

[laklak]

Slim Jims and a bag of Jack Link's, that's the ticket.

[piscator]

Yeah. And Real American food, like pizza and nachos. And none of that pussy Skoal either...

[pErvinalia]

The feds will eventually move on them and kill most of them. Dickheads.

That's exactly what at least one of them wants to happen. "‘I didn’t come here to shoot, I came here to die’: Oregon militia occupiers fess up to local reporters" | Raw Story

Good! A few less nutjobs in the world.

[L'Emmerdeur]

[pErvinalia]

[pErvinalia]

Haven't heard from Seth. I think he's on the way there. He lives nearby, doesn't he?

[JimC]

Haven't heard from Seth. I think he's on the way there. He lives nearby, doesn't he?

Maybe some of them needed an Uber lift?

[piscator]

Haven't heard from Seth. I think he's on the way there. He lives nearby, doesn't he?

Only if you think 1800km counts for "nearby"... (the contiguous US is about the same size as the continent of Australia)


................

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Acting United States Attorney Billy J. Williams
District of Oregon



To The Citizens of Harney County, Oregon



As the Acting United States Attorney for the District of Oregon, I write to the citizens of Harney County to address ongoing attempts by outside individuals and organizations that are making statements and using social media to express views which are clearly contrary to what occurred publicly in an open courtroom. I understand that there are some individuals and organizations who object to the Hammonds returning to prison to serve the remainder of their sentences mandated by statute. I respect their right to peacefully disagree with the prison terms imposed. However, any criminal behavior contemplated by those who may object to the court's mandate that harms someone will not be tolerated and will result in serious consequences. The following is a summary of the facts in United States v. Dwight and Steven Hammond, including the actions and positions taken by this office throughout the course of the case.



Five years ago, a federal grand jury charged Dwight and Steven Hammond with committing arson on public lands, and endangering firefghters. The charges came after the Hammonds rejected an offer to settle the case by pleading guilty to lesser charges and sentences.

Three years ago, after a two-week trial in Pendleton, Oregon, a jury found 70-year old Dwight and his son, 43?year old Steven Hammond, guilty of committing arson on public lands in 2001. Steven Hammond was also found guilty of committing a second arson in 2006. They were found not guilty of other arson charges, and while the jury was deliberating on the remaining charges, the Hammonds negotiated for the dismissal of those charges and a promise from the U.S. Attorney to recommend the minimum sentence mandated by law. The Hammonds assured the trial judge that they knew the law required they serve no less than five years in prison. The U.S. Attorney also agreed they should remain free until sentencing.

The Hammonds had long ranched private and public lands in Eastern Oregon. Although they leased public lands for grazing, they were not permitted to burn the lands without prior
authorization from the BLM. In 1999, a BLM employee reminded Steven Hammond of this after he started a fire that escaped onto public land.

At trial, jurors heard from a hunting guide, a hunter and the hunter's father, who saw the Hammonds illegally, slaughter a herd of deer on public land. At least seven deer were shot with others limping or running from the scene. Less than two hours later, the hunting guide and the hunter and his father were forced to abandon their campsite because a fire was burning in the area where the deer had been shot. The hunting guide's testimony and photographs established fires were burning hours before Steven Hammond called the BLM and said he was going to do a burn of invasive species in the area.

A teenage relative, who was with the Hammonds in 2001 when those fires were set, told the jury that he was handed a box of "Strike Anywhere" matches, and Steven Hammond told him to drop lit matches on the ground so as to "Light up the whole country on fire".
He did as instructed and the resulting eight to ten foot flames spread quickly. Fearing for his life he was forced to take shelter in a creek. The jury heard evidence that once back at the ranch, Dwight and Steven told him to "Keep his mouth shut", and that "Nobody needed to know about the fire".

The fires destroyed evidence of the deer slaughter and took 139 acres of public land out of public use for two years.

...

https://assets.documentcloud.org/docume ... torney.pdf




From another site:

"The Hammond family is eschewing any connection to the Bundy brothers, so why is there so much talk on this thread about the arson charge against Hammond?"

Because that is the professed motive for the occupation. More to the point, its the history of the Hammond family that is the example being held out as evidence of a systematic federal campaign to disenfranchise the "rights" of rural citizens in the West and the ranchers of this county, in particular. The occupiers call it "tyranny", so it's only fair to give their grievance a hearing in order to decide for oneself.

Is this arson conviction evidence of tyranny justifying an armed protest? Free speech, marketplace of ideas, bla bla. I read the Conservative Treehouse version of events cited. Accepting all those claims as fact, in a light most favorable to the Hammonds, this is not tyranny. This is simply something that happens as part of a being a member of a larger society. Sometimes people have to move to make way for progress.
Look at the landscape around us. Everywhere you look, there's reservoirs. in every case, there were families farming and ranching the rich riparian land that got flooded because from time immemorial, riparian land is the first place to be settled. Those families had to move to benefit the other ranchers and farmers. I use dam building as an example because dams are very popular with western ranchers and farmers.

In contrast, this time the feds just want to phase out some grazing leases on bird habitat. The state agencies are worried that sage grouse could end up being listed and that would cause major headaches for all the other law abiding ranchers in sagebrush country. So state and feds are trying to keep that from happening by purchasing sage grouse habitat and retiring grazing leases on some government land. They have spent a shit ton of money trying to revive sage grouse populations. Standing in the way of this are the Hammonds who have a long history of allowing their cattle to roam and insisting the BLM pay to fence in their herds in for them. In return for their lack of cooperation, they expect continued subsidies and no oversight. The irony of this well armed sit-in is that the government isn't even trying to force an eminent domain case on the Hammond's private holdings. There's nothing here that could be remotely called tyranny and the policies in question are being done, in part, to benefit ranchers by keeping Oregon sage grouse from being listed. The Hammond family is the proverbial fly in the ointment.

So, once you give their grievance a full hearing, you can then fairly call the occupiers a bunch of angry, alienated Sagebrush morons who don't have a fucking clue how democracy works or what the difference is between a constitutional right and grazing lease. They have a concept of tyranny that should make even the most casual student of history piss himself with laughter, except they brought assault rifles to their sit-in so it stopped being funny real quick. Freedom from tyranny apparently now means subsidy without oversight, access without rules.

[pErvinalia]

Haven't heard from Seth. I think he's on the way there. He lives nearby, doesn't he?

Only if you think 1800km counts for "nearby"... (the contiguous US is about the same size as the continent of Australia)

That's nearby for Australia... (and gun nuts)

[piscator]

Probably just going lukewarm on this Bundy bunch...

[Tero]

“Before you even know what’s happened they sneak up behind you and clobber you with a sturdy walking cane or large-caliber spotting scope.”
http://www.breakingburgh.com/enraged-bi ... offensive/

[mistermack]

I wouldn't be surprised if the Feds take them on.

Most of the country would love it. Even if they were supporting different sides, it would still make great telly.

Maybe Obama has lost some of his restraint, as he's coming to the end of his stint.
They can't KEEP letting people threaten the Federal Administration with violence. It will only grow. Maybe this is the time to jump on it.

Here's hoping.

[pErvinalia]

Make it a Running Man / HUnger Games style game show. Get live voting and all that. It will be great!

By the way, why hasn't Seth commented on this thread yet? I reckon he's scared of the feds strengthening their surveillance of him. He's trying to keep a low profile. When the shooting starts, though,, he'll be there in the hummer bringing up the rear guard to take on the feds from behind!