• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding metals, finance, politics, government and many other topics"

Oregon militia seizes building 1/2/2016

the_shootist

Old Pasty White Guy
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
52,850
Likes
96,063
Location
Earth
#1

the_shootist

Old Pasty White Guy
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
52,850
Likes
96,063
Location
Earth
#3
My fingers and toes are crossed. I want to be one of the first people to walk across the Royal Lawn and through the Royal Rose Garden and fumigate the White Hut!
 

Aurumag

Ag mirror of truth Aurum purity of mind
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
12,070
Likes
17,041
Location
State of Jefferson
#4

the_shootist

Old Pasty White Guy
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
52,850
Likes
96,063
Location
Earth
#5
MSM keeping this under wraps so far. Again, if this was something that would further the Obama agenda it would be plastered all over CNN and Faux News. It's another example that the government OWNS the media. Right now the government doesn't want this going public however; they don't control the internet yet, do they?
 

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Sr Site Supporter
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
54,676
Likes
105,670
Location
Rocky Mountains
#6
uh oh, here we go...

Militia Group Takes Over Federal Building in Eastern Oregon Because “The Lord Was Not Pleased”

Anti-government militia member releases video pledging to drive to Oregon: "I want to die a free man."

By Aaron Mesh
Updated 8:45 PM
Published 6:40 PM
A group of anti-government militia members have occupied the headquarters and visitors center of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Harney County, Ore., apparently seeking to provoke a standoff with the federal government.

Several of the right-wing militia members are sons of Cliven Bundy, a Nevada cattle rancher whose fight with the U.S. Bureau of Land Management sparked an armed confrontation with federal officials in 2014.

Militia members have been traveling to the town of Burns, Ore. in recent weeks in support of Harney County rancher Dwight Hammond, Jr. and his son Steven Hammond, who in 2012 were convicted of arson for setting fires on federal land where they had poached deer. (The wildfires burned 139 acres of Bureau of Land Management property in 2001.)

The Oregonian reported earlier this week on escalating tensions as the Hammonds' prison date approached.

JJ MacNab, who has covered right-wing extremists for Forbes magazine, first reported this afternoon that militia members had seized the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge headquarters. They appear to be led by Ammon Bundy, one of Cliven's sons.

The building the Bundy and their cohorts have occupied is this headquarters and visitors center 30 miles south of Burns. It was closed for the weekend.


Malheur National Wildlife Refuge headquarters. (Wikipedia)
In a YouTube video released Dec. 31, Ammon Bundy says that God directed him to go to Oregon, a state he had never visited before.

"I began to understand how the Lord felt about the Hammonds," Bundy says in the video. "I began to understand how the Lord felt about Harney County and about this country. And I clearly understood that the Lord was not pleased with what was happening to the Hammonds… If we allowed the Hammonds to continue to be punished, there would be accountability."

In another video, also posted Dec. 31, militia member John Ritzheimer bids farewell to his family as he prepares to drive to Oregon, where he says he is "100 percent willing to lay my life down in order to fight tyranny."

Ritzheimer then directly addresses Dwight Hammond, Jr., the convicted arsonist rancher.

"It's real simple, Dwight: Do you want to die in prison, labeled as a terrorist by these oppressors?" he asks. "Or do you want to die out here with us, as a free man? I want to die a free man."

http://www.wweek.com/2016/01/02/mil...tern-oregon-because-the-lord-was-not-pleased/
 

Alric

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
7,267
Likes
1,795
#7
See and people say these are peaceful protests yet no one believes them. Why? Because people like the shootest are foaming at the mouth for a chance to kill police.
 

gringott

"Veteran of the Battle of Knob Creek"
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
16,699
Likes
24,463
Location
Stable
#9
AP has the story.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/storie...ME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-01-03-03-47-35

From what I read, the problem is they were convicted and served time. Now they are going to be serving more time for the same crime under a different label. IMHO that is double jeopardy. Also, it seems the father and son are cowed by the FedGov, the aren't putting up a fight.

The pennies and flowers were a nice touch.
 

Unca Walt

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
12,317
Likes
21,745
Location
South Floriduh
#10
I am about as far away as possible... but my heart is with them.

Double jeopardy is specifically forbidden by the law that is being ignored by the present government.
 

Joseph

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
4,853
Likes
9,252
Location
south east
#11
See and people say these are peaceful protests yet no one believes them. Why? Because people like the shootest are foaming at the mouth for a chance to kill police.
At least you're consistent, Alric
 

Malus

Gold Chaser
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
3,392
Likes
2,797
Location
In a world gone mad....
#12
Good on em. Its about time people went from playing the complain game/vote for change angle and taken their own lives back. If we listen to "government", they'd have you naked and in chains pounding rocks in the quarry. Hope this stand starts something before its too late to change anything......
 

Ahillock

A nobody
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 30, 2013
Messages
12,430
Likes
11,962
Location
GIM2 server bay #5
#13
Anyone else find the timing of all this a little suspicious? Obama supposedly working on anti-gun EO that he is to unveil this week. Then you have a bunch of guys takeover a "government" building, in rural OR, in the middle of winter in an area where access is easily cut off and the information coming out is limited and hard to trust who is giving the true story and who is giving BS.

Definitely interesting. Definitely a lot of questions going on in my head.
 

Ahillock

A nobody
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 30, 2013
Messages
12,430
Likes
11,962
Location
GIM2 server bay #5
#14
See and people say these are peaceful protests yet no one believes them. Why? Because people like the shootest are foaming at the mouth for a chance to kill police.
Clair, you need to read up on your history.


The Battle of Athens, Tennessee

As Recently As 1946, American Citizens Were

Forced To Take Up Arms As A Last Resort
Against Corrupt Government Officials.

Published in Guns & Ammo October 1995, pp. 50-51

On August 1-2, 1946, some Americans, brutalized by their county government, used armed force as a last resort to overturn it. These Americans wanted honest open elections. For years they had asked for state or federal election monitors to prevent vote fraud (forged ballots, secret ballot counts and intimidation by armed sheriff's deputies) by the local political boss. They got no help.

These Americans' absolute refusal to knuckle under had been hardened by service in World War II. Having fought to free other countries from murderous regimes, they rejected vicious abuse by their county government.

These Americans had a choice. Their state's Constitution -- Article 1, Section 26 -- recorded their right to keep and bear arms for the common defense. Few "gun control" laws had been enacted.

These Americans were residents of McMinn County, which is located between Chattanooga and Knoxville in Eastern Tennessee. The two main towns were Athens and Etowah. McMinn County residents had long been independent political thinkers. For a long time they also had: accepted bribe-taking by politicians and/or the sheriff to overlook illicit whiskey-making and gambling; financed the sheriff's department from fines-usually for speeding or public drunkenness which promoted false arrests; and put up with voting fraud by both Democrats and Republicans.

The wealthy Cantrell family, of Etowah, backed Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the 1932 election, hoping New Deal programs would revive the local economy and help Democrats to replace Republicans in the county government. So it proved.

Paul Cantrell was elected sheriff in the 1936,1938 and 1940 elections, but by slim margins. The sheriff was the key county official. Cantrell was elected to the state senate in 1942 and 1944; his chief deputy, Pat Mansfield, was elected sheriff. In 1946 Paul Cantrell again sought the sheriff's office.

At the end of 1945, some 3,000 battle-hardened veterans returned to McMinn County; the GIs held Cantrell politically responsible for Mansfield's doings. Early in 1946, some newly returned ex-GIs decided to challenge Cantrell politically by offering an all-ex-GI, non-partisan ticket. They promised a fraud-free election, stating in ads and speeches that there would be an honest ballot count and reform of county government.

At a rally, a GI speaker said, "The principles that we fought for in this past war do not exist in McMinn County. We fought for democracy because we believe in democracy but not the form we live under in this county" (Daily Post-Athenian, 17 June 1946, p.1 ). At the end of July 1946, 159 McMinn County GIs petitioned the FBI to send election monitors. There was no response. The Department of Justice had not responded to McMinn County residents' complaints of election fraud in 1940, 1942 and 1944.


FROM BALLOTS TO BULLETS

The primary election was held on August 1. To intimidate voters, Mansfield brought in some 200 armed "deputies." GI poll-watchers were beaten almost at once. At about 3 p.m., Tom Gillespie, an African- American voter was told by a sheriff's deputy that he could not vote. Despite being beaten, Gillespie persisted. The enraged deputy shot him. The gunshot drew a crowd. Rumors spread that Gillespie had been shot in the back; he later recovered (C. Stephen Byrum, The Battle of Athens, Paidia Productions, Chattanooga, TN, 1987; pp. 155-57).

Other deputies detained ex-GI poll-watchers in a polling place, as that made the ballot counting "Public" A crowd gathered. Sheriff Mansfield told his deputies to disperse the crowd. When the two ex-GIs smashed a big window and escaped, the crowd surged forward. The deputies, with guns drawn, formed a tight half-circle around the front of the polling place. One deputy, "his gun raised high...shouted: 'If you sons of bitches cross this street I'll kill you!'" (Byrum, p.165).

Mansfield took the ballot boxes to the jail for counting. The deputies seemed to fear immediate attack by the "people who had just liberated Europe and the South Pacific from two of the most powerful war machines in human history" (Byrum, pp. 168-69).

Short of firearms and ammunition, the GIs scoured the county to find them. By borrowing keys to the National Guard and State Guard armories, they got three M-1 rifles, five .45 semi-automatic pistols and 24 British Enfield rifles. The armories were nearly empty after the war's end. By 8 p.m. a group of GIs and "local boys" headed for the jail but left the back door unguarded to give the jail's defenders an easy way out.

Three GIs alerting passersby to danger were fired on from the jail. Two GIs were wounded. Other GIs returned fire.

Firing subsided after 30 minutes; ammunition ran low and night had fallen. Thick brick walls shielded those inside the jail. Absent radios, the GIs' rifle fire was uncoordinated. "From the hillside fire rose and fell in disorganized cascades. More than anything else, people were simply shooting at the jail" (Byrum, p.189).

Several who ventured into the street in front of the jail were wounded. One man inside the jail was badly hurt; he recovered. Most sheriff's deputies wanted to hunker down and await rescue. Governor McCord mobilized the State Guard, perhaps to scare the GIs into withdrawing. The State Guard never went to Athens. McCord may have feared that Guard units filled with ex-GIs might not fire on other ex-GIs.

At about 2 a.m. on August 2, the GIs forced the issue. Men from Meigs County threw dynamite sticks and damaged the jail's porch. The panicked deputies surrendered. GIs quickly secured the building. Paul Cantrell faded into the night, having almost been shot by a GI who knew him, but whose .45 pistol had jammed. Mansfield's deputies were kept overnight in jail for their own safety. Calm soon returned. The GIs posted guards. The rifles borrowed from the armory were cleaned and returned before sunup.


THE AFTERMATH: RESTORING DEMOCRACY

In five precincts free of vote fraud, the GI candidate for sheriff, Knox Henry, won 1,168 votes to Cantrell's 789. Other GI candidates won by similar margins.

The GI's did not hate Cantrell. They only wanted honest government. On August 2, a town meeting set up a three-man governing committee. The regular police having fled, six men were chosen to police Etowah. In addition, "Individual citizens were called upon to form patrols or guard groups, often led by a GI... To their credit, however, there is not a single mention of an abuse of power on their behalf" (Byrum, p. 220).

Once the GI candidates' victory had been certified, they cleaned up county government, the jail was fixed, newly elected officials accepted a $5,000 pay limit and Mansfield supporters who resigned were replaced.

The general election on November 5 passed quietly. McMinn County residents, having restored the rule of law, returned to their daily lives. Pat Mansfield moved back to Georgia. Paul Cantrell set up an auto dealership in Etowah. "Almost everyone who knew Cantrell in the years after the Battle' agree that he was not bitter about what had happened" (Byrum pp. 232-33; see also New York Times, 9 August 1946, p. 8).

The 79th Congress adjourned on August 2, 1946, when the Battle of Athens ended. However, Representative John Jennings Jr. from Tennessee decried McMinn County's sorry situation under Cantrell and Mansfield and the Justice Department's repeated failures to help the McMinn County residents. Jennings was delighted that "...at long last, decency and honesty, liberty and law have returned to the fine county of McMinn.. " (Congressional Record, House; U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1946; Appendix, Volume 92, Part 13, p. A4870).


THE LESSONS OF ATHENS

Those who took up arms in Athens, Tennessee, wanted honest elections, a cornerstone of our constitutional order. They had repeatedly tried to get federal or state election monitors and had used armed force so as to minimize harm to the law-breakers, showing little malice to the defeated law-breakers. They restored lawful government.

The Battle of Athens clearly shows how Americans can and should lawfully use armed force and also shows why the rule of law requires unrestricted access to firearms and how civilians with military-type firearms can beat the forces of government gone bad.

Dictators believe that public order is more important than the rule of law. However, Americans reject this idea. Brutal political repression is lethal to many. An individual criminal can harm a handful of people. Governments alone can brutalize thousands, or millions.

Law-abiding McMinn County residents won the Battle of Athens because they were not hamstrung by "gun control " They showed us when citizens can and should use armed force to support the rule of law.


http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/athens.htm
 

SilverCity

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
3,784
Likes
3,768
Location
FEMA Region VI
#15
Cliven Bundy Asks Hammonds to Turn Themselves into Harney County Jail Ask for Protective Custody

http://agenda21radio.com/?p=22895

Civil Unrest Continues to Build Around Eastern Oregon Rancher Case

Dear Friends,

Today we are marching in Oregon to stand up for the Hammonds, it is bitter cold with plenty of snow on the ground but we will not waiver.

We wish you were here, but if not could we ask a small favor?
Would you please forward this Press Release to your local newspaper and TV outlets?

This is perhaps the simplest thing you can do to help the Hammonds, we must bring attention to them now.


FOR IMMEDIATE PRESS RELEASE:
CLIVEN D. BUNDY
PO Box 7175
Bunkerville, NV 89007
702-346-5564
January 1, 2016 – Bunkerville, NV USA
With great concern and love and much consideration from prayer, I come to you Harney County Sheriff of Oregon David M. Ward, rancher Steven Dwight Hammond, and rancher Dwight Lincoln Hammond, Jr.,
I, Cliven D. Bundy, have been involved for several weeks in the background striving to understand and comprehend your dilemmas in Harney County, Oregon. I understand that the grass that was burnt on each side of the fence was grazing rights that had been created through beneficial use, one side of the fence being private property and the other side of the fence being private property rights. The fires that were set were for a good purpose and had good results.
The United States Justice Department has NO jurisdiction or authority within the State of Oregon, County of Harney over this type of ranch management. These lands are not under U.S. treaties or commerce, they are not article 4 territories, and Congress does not have unlimited power. These lands have been admitted into statehood and are part of the great State of Oregon and the citizens of Harney County enjoy the fullness of the protections of the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Constitution limits United States government.
It is my suggestion, Steven Hammond, that you go and check yourself into Harney County jail asking for protective custody. It is my suggestion, Dwight Hammond, that you go and check yourself into Harney County jail asking for protective custody. It is my suggestion, Harney County Sheriff David Ward, accept these two ranchers into your jail, notify the United States Solicitor in Washington DC that you have these two ranchers in Harney County jail, that they will remain there indefinitely under your protective custody and the protection of We the People of Harney County and We the People of the United States of America.
I suggest an Evidentiary Hearing or a Grand Jury be formed by We the People.
I feel that this action is immediately important, that it should be taken place before 10:00 am Saturday, January 2, 2016. I will hold these suggestions private until that time then I will release this letter to those having state and county jurisdiction and to the media.
Cliven D. Bundy


SC


 

Alric

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
7,267
Likes
1,795
#16
I think people are created to be free. And as such want to be free people. No ones foaming at the mouth.
This is what push back looks like. The govt may not do anything this time. They weren't prepared. Next time it'll be Waco or worse
This is what anarchy looks like. They basically want the laws not to apply to them. They don't want any laws at all. They literally just set fire to stuff with no concern of the harm it might do. What would of happened if someone died in the fire? You just shrug you shoulder and say that to have a free society some times random people just need to burn to death? Give me a break.
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,404
Likes
4,216
#17
They want the rule of Constitutional law, not this admiralty law crap that is used by all Federal courts. They are standing up for the Constitution for the united States of America.
 

Ahillock

A nobody
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 30, 2013
Messages
12,430
Likes
11,962
Location
GIM2 server bay #5
#18
This is what anarchy looks like. They basically want the laws not to apply to them. They don't want any laws at all. They literally just set fire to stuff with no concern of the harm it might do. What would of happened if someone died in the fire? You just shrug you shoulder and say that to have a free society some times random people just need to burn to death? Give me a break.
If "they" that you are talking about is Obama/D.C. politicians, than you would be correct in this statement.
 

Alric

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
7,267
Likes
1,795
#19
They want the rule of Constitutional law, not this admiralty law crap that is used by all Federal courts. They are standing up for the Constitution for the united States of America.
No they want anarchy with no laws at all. What they already have is Constitutional law and they want no part of that.

If "they" that you are talking about is Obama/D.C. politicians, than you would be correct in this statement.
By they, I mean the people who think it is okay to randomly set open ground on fire and start wild fires that could kill people and destroy other people's homes and property, because they think they are above the law.
 

Ahillock

A nobody
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 30, 2013
Messages
12,430
Likes
11,962
Location
GIM2 server bay #5
#20
By they, I mean the people who think it is okay to randomly set open ground on fire and start wild fires that could kill people and destroy other people's homes and property, because they think they are above the law.
Then you are wrong. Your true colors are showing again.
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,404
Likes
4,216
#21
Facts & Event - Hammond Family
Facts & Events

The Harney Basin (were the Hammond ranch is established) was settled in the 1870’s. The valley was settled by multiple ranchers and was known to have run over 300,000 head of cattle. These ranchers developed a state of the art irrigated system to water the meadows, and it soon became a favorite stopping place for migrating birds on their annual trek north.

In 1908 President Theodor Roosevelt, in a political scheme, create an “Indian reservation” around the Malheur, Mud & Harney Lakes and declared it “as a preserve and breeding ground for native birds”. Later this “Indian reservation” (without Indians) became the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.

In 1964 the Hammonds purchased their ranch in the Harney Basin. The purchase included approximately 6000 acres of private property, 4 grazing rights on public land, a small ranch house and 3 water rights. The ranch is around 53 miles South of Burns, Oregon.

By the 1970’s nearly all the ranches adjacent to the Blitzen Valley were purchased by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and added to the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. The refuge covers over 187,000 acres and stretches over 45 miles long and 37 miles wide. The expansion of the refuge grew and surrounds to the Hammond’s ranch. Being approached many times by the FWS, the Hammonds refused to sell. Other ranchers also choose not to sell.

During the 1970’s the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), in conjunction with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), took a different approach to get the ranchers to sell. Ranchers were told that, “grazing was detrimental to wildlife and must be reduced”. 32 out of 53 permits were revoked and many ranchers were forced to leave. Grazing fees were raised significantly for those who were allowed to remain. Refuge personnel took over the irrigation system claiming it as their own.

By 1980 a conflict was well on its way over water allocations on the adjacent privately owned Silvies Plain. The FWS wanted to acquire the ranch lands on the Silvies Plain to add to their already vast holdings. Refuge personnel intentional diverted the water to bypassing the vast meadowlands, directing the water into the rising Malheur Lakes. Within a few short years the surface area of the lakes doubled. Thirty-one ranches on the Silvies plains were flooded. Homes, corrals, barns and graze-land were washed a way and destroyed. The ranchers that once fought to keep the FWS from taking their land, now broke and destroyed, begged the FWS to acquire their useless ranches. In 1989 the waters began to recede and now the once thriving privately owned Silvies pains are a proud part of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge claimed by the FWS.

By the 1990’s the Hammonds were one of the very few ranchers that still owned private property adjacent to the refuge. Susie Hammond in an effort to make sense of what was going on began compiling fact about the refuge. In a hidden public record she found a study that was done by the FWS in 1975. The study showed that the “no use” policies of the FWS on the refuge were causing the wildlife to leave the refuge and move to private property. The study showed that the private property adjacent to the Malheur Wildlife Refuge produced 4 times more ducks and geese than the refuge did. It also showed that the migrating birds were 13 times more likely to land on private property than on the refuge. When Susie brought this to the attention of the FWS and refuge personnel, her and her family became the subjects of a long train of abuses and corruptions.

In the early 1990’s the Hammonds filed on a livestock water source and obtained a deed for the water right from the State of Oregon. When the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) found out that the Hammonds obtained new water rights near the Malhuer Wildlife Refuge, they were agitated and became belligerent and vindictive towards the Hammonds. The US Fish and Wildlife Service challenged the Hammonds right to the water in an Oregon State Circuit Court. The court found that the Hammonds legally obtained rights to the water in accordance to State law and therefore the use of the water belongs to the Hammonds.*

In August 1994 the BLM & FWS illegally began building a fence around the Hammonds water source. Owning the water rights and knowing that their cattle relied on that water source daily the Hammonds tried to stop the building of the fence. The BLM & FWS called the Harney County Sheriff department and had Dwight Hammond (Father) arrested and charged with "disturbing and interfering with" federal officials or federal contractors (two counts, each a felony). He spent one night in the Deschutes County Jail in Bend, and a second night behind bars in Portland before he was hauled before a federal magistrate and released without bail. A hearing on the charges was postponed and the federal judge never set another date.

The FWS also began restricting access to upper pieces of the Hammond’s private property. In order to get to the upper part of the Hammond’s ranch they had to go on a road that went through the Malhuer Wildlife Refuge. The FWS began barricading the road and threatening the Hammonds if they drove through it. The Hammonds removed the barricades and gates and continued to use their right of access. The road was proven later to be owned by the County of Harney. This further enraged the BLM & FWS.

Shortly after the road & water disputes, the BLM & FWS arbitrarily revoked the Hammond’s upper grazing permit without any given cause, court proceeding or court ruling. As a traditional “fence out state” Oregon requires no obligation on the part of an owner to keep his or her livestock within a fence or to maintain control over the movement of the livestock. The Hammonds intended to still use their private property for grazing. However, they were informed that a federal judge ruled, in a federal court, that the federal government did not have to observe the Oregon fence out law. “Those laws are for the people, not for them”.

The Hammonds were forced to either build and maintain miles of fences or be restricted from the use of their private property. Cutting their ranch in almost half, they could not afford to fence the land, so the cattle were removed.


Dwight Hammond (Father)

The Hammonds experienced many years of financial hardship due to the ranch being diminished. The Hammonds had to sale their ranch and home in order to purchase another property that had enough grass to feed their cattle. This property included two grazing rights on public land. Those were also arbitrarily revoked later.

The owner of the Hammond’s original ranch passed away from a heart attack and the Hammonds made a trade for the ranch back.

In the early fall of 2001, Steven Hammond (Son) called the fire department, informing them that he was going to be performing a routine prescribed burn on their ranch. Later that day he started a prescribed fire on their private property. The fire went onto public land and burned 127 acres of grass. The Hammonds put the fire out themselves. There was no communication about the burn from the federal government to the Hammonds at that time. Prescribed fires are a common method that Native Americans and ranchers have used in the area to increase the health & productivity of the land for many centuries.

In 2006 a massive lightning storm started multiple fires that joined together inflaming the countryside. To prevent the fire from destroying their winter range and possibly their home, Steven Hammond (Son) started a backfire on their private property. The backfire was successful in putting out the lightning fires that had covered thousands of acres within a short period of time. The backfire saved much of the range and vegetation needed to feed the cattle through the winter. Steven’s mother, Susan Hammond said: “The backfire worked perfectly, it put out the fire, saved the range and possibly our home”.

The next day federal agents went to the Harney County Sheriff's office and filled a police report making accusation against Dwight and Steven Hammond for starting the backfire. A few days after the backfire a Range-Con from the Burns District BLM office asked Steven if he would meet him in town (Frenchglen) for coffee. Steven accepted. When leaving he was arrested by the Harney County Sheriff Dave Glerup and BLM Ranger Orr. Sheriff Glerup then ordered him to go to the ranch and bring back his father. Both Dwight and Steven were booked and on multiple Oregon State charges. The Harney County District Attorney reviewed the accusation, evidence and charges, and determined that the accusations against Dwight & Steven Hammond did not warrant prosecution and dropped all the charges.


Steven Hammond (Son)

In 2011, 5 years after the police report was taken, the U.S. Attorney Office accused Dwight and Steven Hammond of completely different charges, they accused them of being “Terrorist” under the Federal Antiterrorism Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. This act carries a minimum sentence of five years in prison and a maximum sentence of death. Dwight & Steven’s mug shots were all over the news the next week posing them as “Arsonists”. Susan Hammond (Wife & Mother) said: “I would walk down the street or go in a store, people I had known for years would take extreme measures to avoid me”.

Shortly after the sentencing, Capital Press ran a story about the Hammonds. A person who identified as Greg Allum posted three comments on the article, calling the ranchers “clowns” who endangered firefighters and other people in the area while burning valuable rangeland. Greg Allum, a retired BLM heavy equipment operator, soon called Capital Press to complain that he had not made those comments and request that they be taken down from the website. Capital Press removed the comments. A search of the Internet Protocol address associated with the comments revealed it is owned by the BLM’s office in Denver, Colorado. Allum said, he is friends with the Hammonds and was alerted to the comments by neighbors who knew he wouldn’t have written them. “I feel bad for them. They lost a lot and they’re going to lose more,” Allum said of the ranchers. “They’re not terrorists. There’s this hatred in the BLM for them, and I don’t get it,” The retired BLM employee said. Jody Weil, deputy state director for communications at BLM’s Oregon office, indicated to reporters that if one of their agents falsified the comments, they would keep it private and not inform the public.

In September 2006, Dwight & Susan Hammond’s home was raided. The agents informed the Hammonds that they were looking for evidence that would connect them to the fires. The Hammonds later found out that a boot print and a tire tracks were found near one of the many fires. No matching boots or tires were found in the Hammonds home or on their property. Susan Hammond (Wife) later said; " I have never felt so violated in my life. We are ranchers not criminals”. Steven Hammond openly maintains his testimony that he started the backfire to save the winter grass from being destroyed and that the backfire ended up working so well it put out the fire entirely altogether.

During the trial proceedings, Federal Court Judge Michael Hogan did not allow time for certain testimonies and evidence into the trail that would exonerate the Hammonds. Federal prosecuting attorney, Frank Papagni, was given full access for 6 days. He had ample time to use any evidence or testimony that strengthened the demonization of the Hammonds. The Hammonds attorney was only allowed 1 day. Much of the facts about the fires, land and why the Hammonds acted the way they did was not allowed into the proceedings and was not heard by the jury. For example, Judge Hogan did not allow time for the jury to hear or review certified scientific findings that the fires improved the health and productivity of the land. Or, that the Hammonds had been subject to vindictive behavior by multiple federal agencies for years.

Federal attorneys, Frank Papagni, hunted down a witness that was not mentally capable to be a credible witness. Dusty Hammond (grandson and nephew) testified that Steven told him to start a fire. He was 13 at the time and 24 when he testified (11 years later). At 24 Dusty had been suffering with mental problems for many years. He had estranged his family including his mother. Judge Hogan noted that Dusty’s memories as a 13-year-old boy were not clear or credible. He allowed the prosecution to continually use Dusty’s testimony anyway. When speaking to the Hammonds about this testimony, they understood that Dusty was manipulated and expressed nothing but love for their troubled grandson.

Judge Michael Hogan & Frank Papagni tampered with the jury many times throughout the proceedings, including during the selection process. Hogan & Papagni only allowed people on the jury who did not understand the customs and culture of the ranchers or how the land is used and cared for in the Diamond Valley. All of the jurors had to drive back and forth to Pendleton everyday. Some drove more than two hours each way. By day 8 they were exhausted and expressed desires to be home. On the final day, Judge Hogan kept pushing them to make a verdict. Several times during deliberation, Judge Hogan pushed them to make a decision. Judge Hogan also would not allow the jury to hear what punishment could be imposed upon an individual that has convicted as a terrorist under the 1996 act. The jury, not understanding the customs and cultures of the area, influenced by the prosecutors for 6 straight days, very exhausted, pushed for a verdict by the judge, unaware of the ramification of convicting someone as a terrorist, made a verdict and went home.

June 22, 2012, Dwight and Steven were found guilty of starting both the 2001 and the 2006 fires by the jury. However, the federal courts convicted them both as "Terrorist" under the 1996 Antiterrorism Act. Judge Hogan sentenced Dwight (Father) to 3 months in prison and Steven (son) to 12 months in federal prison. They were also stipulated to pay $400,000 to the BLM. Hogan overruling the minimum terrorist sentence, commenting that if the full five years were required it would be a violation of the 8th amendment (cruel and unusual punishment). The day of the sentencing Judge Hogan retired as a federal judge. In his honor the staff served chocolate cake in the courtroom.

On January 4,, 2013, Dwight and Steven reported to prison. They fulfilled their sentences, (Dwight 3 months, Steven 12 months). Dwight was released in March 2013 and Steven, January 2014.

Sometime in June 2014, Rhonda Karges, Field Manager for the BLM, and her husband Chad Karges, Refuge Manager for the Malheur Wildlife Refuge (which surrounds the Hammond ranch), along with attorney Frank Papagni exemplifying further vindictive behavior by filing an appeal with the 9th District Federal Court seeking Dwight’s and Steven’s return to federal prison for the entire 5 years.*


Hammond Family

In October 2015, the 9th District Court “resentenced” Dwight and Steven, requiring them to return to prison for several more years. Steven (46) has a wife and 3 children. Dwight (74) will leave Susan (74) to be alone after 55 years of marriage. If he survives, he will be 79 when he is released.

During the court preceding the Hammonds were forced to grant the BLM first right of refusal. If the Hammonds ever sold their ranch they would have to sell it to the BLM.

Dwight and Steven are ordered to report to federal prison again on January 4th, 2016 to begin their resentencing. Both their wives will have to manage the ranch for several years without them. To date they have paid $200,000 to the BLM, and the remainder $200,000 must be paid before the end of this year (2015). If the Hammonds cannot pay the fines to the BLM, they will be forced to sell the ranch to the BLM or face further prosecution.
Notes:

Rhonda Karges – Resource Field Manager for the BLM is the wife of Chad Karges Refuge Manager for the Malheur Wildlife refuge.
Rhonda specifically deals with all the BLM issues relating to the area in and around Hammonds property including “grazing denial”. Her husband just happens to be the person in charge of all the issues surrounding the Hammonds ranch such as “water and access”.

Soon after the water rights dispute the federal government influenced the State of Oregon to change their water law in favor of federal agencies. Wildlife is now considered in the State of Oregon as an accepted beneficial use for government agencies only.

Being convicted as Terrorist made the Hammonds felons. They have been striped of their right to have guns. The Hammond live 53 miles from the closets town and have no practical way of defending themselves or their cattle. Several times they have watched baby calves be eaten by predators and could do nothing to prevent it.


Conclusion

The abuses and corruptions affecting people like the Hammonds are symptoms of a more encompassing problem. Government employees (fulltime & elected) have changed their culture from one of service to, and respect for the people, to the roll of being a masters. On the subject of the land, it is evident that government employees are no longer assisting the people in claiming, using and defending property. Instead, they have become the people’s competitor to the benefits of the land, and are willing to use force on those who they erroneously compete against.

The federal government adversely controls over 582,000,000 acres of the western lands, 51% of the entire western land mass. They also have recently begun claiming over 72% of western resources such as the sub-surface minerals, forestry and waters. This is in comparison to 4.29% federally controlled land in the east.

The impact of the federal government controlling the land and resources inside the western states is hard to calculate. The negative impact on the people can be seen economically, politically, and socially. In order for any people to survive, let alone prosper, it takes the land and resources to do it. Everything we eat, the clothing we wear, the homes we live in, the cars we drive, and so on, come from the earth. All physical comfort and prosperity originates from the earth. Individuals composing the federal government, understanding the origination of wealth, are reserving these resources for themselves and are willing to use force to retain them. The ramifications of their action are slowly forcing the people of the west into poverty.

Due to the fact that people cannot survive without land and resource, the federal government’s action in administering the lands for their own benefit will be the cause of public discontent and unrest until it is corrected.

The solution is very simple, the land and resources must be made available to its rightful owners, the people. This can be done peacefully if the states & counties would check and balance the federal government as designed. When this happens, the people will begin to prosper and much of the economical, political and social problem of the west will diminish. Prosperity, peace and tranquility will be the results.


Thank you,
Ammon Bundy
Bundy Family

Links

Letter to Harney County Sheriff - David Ward:
http://bundyranch.blogspot.com/2015/11/letter-to-sheriff-ward-harney-county.html

Facts & Events :
http://bundyranch.blogspot.com/2015/11/facts-events-in-hammond-case.html

Violations, Corruptions and Abuses:
http://bundyranch.blogspot.com/2015/11/violations-corruptions-and-abuses-in.html

Conclusion: http://bundyranch.blogspot.com/2015/11/conclusion-in-hammonds-case.html

Letter to Government Official and Aware Citizens: http://bundyranch.blogspot.com/2015/11/hammond-family-declared-as-terrorist.html
Posted 1 week ago by Ammon Bundy
 

Alric

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
7,267
Likes
1,795
#22
Then you are wrong. Your true colors are showing again.
My true colors? I have always been pretty clear in what I believe.

1. He was convicted of a crime, by a jury of his peers. While the reasons are disputed, everyone is in agreement that he did illegally set a fire that burned a large piece of land. This is dangerous and arson isn't a light matter. It isn't like he jaywalked, he was setting stuff on fire. Some of the reports are even more troubling, saying they set the fire to burn evidence, and were putting people's lives in danger. This makes them a pretty bad example to put up for government tyranny since they are convicted criminals who appear to have no concern for the law.

2. I actually am concerned with issues like double jeopardy. When I first heard about this news, I was actually on their side. However the protesters are not using double jeopardy as the reason for what they are doing, and instead using crazy and silly arguments, such as the government can't own land and the government has no legal right to stop arson on public land. The arguments they use are absurd. If you actually wanted to help these people, I would be suggesting hiring a good lawyer, not going around and saying stupid stuff in public. The first might improve the situation, the second only makes things worse.

3. I am perfectly fine with civil disobedience, and thus I don't really mind that a bunch of people took over a federal building, even if it was for stupid reason. You want to say something, you have the freedom to express yourself, so that isn't an issue. Though I do have a problem with the people who are bringing weapons with the express purpose of trying to escalate the situation because they want to kill people. These people are not freedom lovers but anarchist who have no problem using violence to get what they want, and I don't condone that sort of action. And even if they are not all like that, there is definitely a large group who are. I would strongly advise people no to attend these sort of things, because associating with violent extremist may get you into serious trouble.

4. I have sympathy for people who might feel that their voice isn't being heard and feel frustrated with things. However, people who are hoping for a shootout because they think violence is fun or exciting, and they want to put their shooting skills to use in a real fight, absolutely disgust me. These people really are terrorists, because they want to harm and kill people
 

Ahillock

A nobody
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 30, 2013
Messages
12,430
Likes
11,962
Location
GIM2 server bay #5
#23
Bigjon, nice find. This is nuts as more information of the back story comes out.
 

Alric

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
7,267
Likes
1,795
#24
Also, I can actually respect the fact that the Hammonds are taking responsibility for what they did. I obviously don't agree with them setting the fire, but they are turning them self in, and using legal means to deal with the issue and I can respect that. Also, they are distancing them self from the other group, and want nothing to do with them. Which is probably good for them, because they don't want to get caught up with the people using violence.
 

Ahillock

A nobody
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 30, 2013
Messages
12,430
Likes
11,962
Location
GIM2 server bay #5
#25
Also, I can actually respect the fact that the Hammonds are taking responsibility for what they did. I obviously don't agree with them setting the fire, but they are turning them self in, and using legal means to deal with the issue and I can respect that. Also, they are distancing them self from the other group, and want nothing to do with them. Which is probably good for them, because they don't want to get caught up with the people using violence.
Where is this violence that you speak of Clair?
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,404
Likes
4,216
#26
I'm sure Claire would approve of this destruction of private property by BLM agents.

BLM Destroying Ranches by Fire 002
Published on Dec 31, 2015
Days after the Hammonds were sentenced as "Arsenal Terrorists" the BLM started multiple fires that killed & injured cattle, burned homes and destroyed other property.

 

Ensoniq

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
8,914
Likes
18,468
Location
North Carolina
#27
Alric you must live in the East.

The term Arson being used to describe a controlled burn is improper. It may be the technical charge or conviction but a good steward of the land knows that prevent huge uncontrollable fires there needs to be periodic controlled burning of the overgrowth

The forest service has traditionally been against this and as such they are the cause of the seriousness of some of the worst fires this century.

Now if they were burning to cover up poaching (which I don't know to be true) then I'd have another opinion. But in living through some of these fires in California where friends homes burned to the ground and whole towns were lost, I understand the reason for controlled burns.
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,404
Likes
4,216
#28
Claire is obviously a city slicker, without a clue about most everything related to ranching and cattle.

She makes a lot of accusations, but puts up NO evidence.
 

Alric

Midas Member
Midas Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2011
Messages
7,267
Likes
1,795
#30
Alric you must live in the East.
No, I live in the west. Specifically in Nevada. Which actually puts me pretty close to where the Bundy stuff was happening. Not that I wander around out in the desert, but a lot of the problems was with his cattle wandering into the Lake Mead recreational area, which I have been to. Oregon is a lot farther away, I wouldn't want to drive up there.

The term Arson being used to describe a controlled burn is improper. It may be the technical charge or conviction but a good steward of the land knows that prevent huge uncontrollable fires there needs to be periodic controlled burning of the overgrowth
I am well aware of that. The problem was that it was an illegal burn that went out of control. Best case scenario is that he was being irresponsible. If the claim of him setting the fire to hide evidence of other illegal activities are true, then that is 100% arson. He set the fire on purpose though, and it was illegal, which makes it arson regardless.

The forest service has traditionally been against this and as such they are the cause of the seriousness of some of the worst fires this century.

Now if they were burning to cover up poaching (which I don't know to be true) then I'd have another opinion. But in living through some of these fires in California where friends homes burned to the ground and whole towns were lost, I understand the reason for controlled burns.
I don't know all the details either, however we do know he went to court and was convicted by a jury. Which means the jury believed the evidence presented pointed towards arson. No one came forward claiming the jury was bribed, or that there was illegal activity going on during the court case. The people arrested are also going along with the courts ruling.

So given all that, I don't see a reason to not conclude it is true.
 

Ahillock

A nobody
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 30, 2013
Messages
12,430
Likes
11,962
Location
GIM2 server bay #5
#31
I am well aware of that. The problem was that it was an illegal burn that went out of control. Best case scenario is that he was being irresponsible. If the claim of him setting the fire to hide evidence of other illegal activities are true, then that is 100% arson. He set the fire on purpose though, and it was illegal, which makes it arson regardless.
Incorrect. Stop spreading lies and falsehoods.


"In the early fall of 2001, Steven Hammond (Son) called the fire department, informing them that he was going to be performing a routine prescribed burn on their ranch. Later that day he started a prescribed fire on their private property. The fire went onto public land and burned 127 acres of grass. The Hammonds put the fire out themselves. There was no communication about the burn from the federal government to the Hammonds at that time. Prescribed fires are a common method that Native Americans and ranchers have used in the area to increase the health & productivity of the land for many centuries.

In 2006 a massive lightning storm started multiple fires that joined together inflaming the countryside. To prevent the fire from destroying their winter range and possibly their home, Steven Hammond (Son) started a backfire on their private property. The backfire was successful in putting out the lightning fires that had covered thousands of acres within a short period of time. The backfire saved much of the range and vegetation needed to feed the cattle through the winter. Steven’s mother, Susan Hammond said: “The backfire worked perfectly, it put out the fire, saved the range and possibly our home”."
 

the_shootist

Old Pasty White Guy
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
May 31, 2015
Messages
52,850
Likes
96,063
Location
Earth
#32
Alric will lie with impunity to try and make his/her/its point. Take what it says with a grain of salt
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,914
Likes
10,871
#33
I fail to see how anything the Hammonds have done warrants a charge of "terrorism". These men were found guilty of a crime by a jury of their peers and have paid their debt to society. They should now be left alone.

The federal government has no authority to then "re-sentence" them for the very same charges. I would say it is the federal government that is behaving in a manner that is consistent with the term "terrorism" and not the Hammond family. We all know that the federal government is out of control and no longer recognizes Constitutional restraints. Many many people in this country are sick of DC doing whatever DC wants and ignoring the law of the land...the Constitution. People have been trying to change the course we're on for decades on end. Peaceful protest does not work, voting does not work, contacting your alleged representatives does not work. Eventually people get sick of being terrorized and feeling powerless to stop it and you get incidents like this and the stand off at the Bundy ranch.
 

oldgaranddad

Platinum Bling
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
6,087
Likes
12,136
Location
On the top shelf.
#34
If these occupiers are smart they will have a second or third contingent to overlook any FBI, BLM, etc. staging areas. Police tactics are always the same. Forward with little regard to the six o'clock end. The FEDs/LE will not challenge the as of yet unnamed by the mainstream media with some catchy evil name militia if their flanks are exposed to return fire if one shot rings out. That is why the FEDS backed down at the Bundy ranch. They couldn't engage without getting a round in the backside.

Don't be surprised to see a presidential candidate visiting them either. Trump will have the balls to ride on over first for chat and the rest of the GOP pack will scramble to follow. The Democrats will visit the FED encampment to denounce the lawlessness.

I just wish I had the popcorn concession to this show. It is going to be a long one.
 

Ahillock

A nobody
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 30, 2013
Messages
12,430
Likes
11,962
Location
GIM2 server bay #5
#35
I fail to see how anything the Hammonds have done warrants a charge of "terrorism". These men were found guilty of a crime by a jury of their peers and have paid their debt to society. They should now be left alone.
I think that is the thing that is getting people riled up. I am still doing research on the situation, but it appears the Feds are grossly overstepping again on this one.
 

BeefJerky

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
934
Likes
1,185
#36
Just a convenient event with impeccable timing. This is scripted. Just not sure how far it will be taken.
Poor suckers lost support from the supposed cause. How crappy is that?
 

solarion

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Nov 25, 2013
Messages
6,914
Likes
10,871
#37
I think that is the thing that is getting people riled up. I am still doing research on the situation, but it appears the Feds are grossly overstepping again on this one.
It's certainly causing my panties to bunch. I wonder how the jurors in that case feel about this action by the feds. The fact that the Hammond men have agreed to report to federal prison shows that they're worn down. At 73? Dwight Hammond could conceivable spend the rest of his time on Earth in a cell for a crime in which he has already paid for. They don't owe 5 years of their lives to society. The federal government & it's agents are again acting like organized criminals with the added advantage that they have a monopoly on the use of legalized force. I'm sick and tired of seeing my fellow countrymen and women persecuted by an out of control tyrannical regime.
 

Ensoniq

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
8,914
Likes
18,468
Location
North Carolina
#38
I wonder how the jurors in that case feel about this action by the feds
We should try to contact them, half probably retired to Hawaii, the other head in the French Riviera with their "jury pay"
 

Ahillock

A nobody
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 30, 2013
Messages
12,430
Likes
11,962
Location
GIM2 server bay #5
#39
Just a convenient event with impeccable timing. This is scripted. Just not sure how far it will be taken.
Poor suckers lost support from the supposed cause. How crappy is that?
I have thought about that as well, especially with Obama's EO on guns supposedly happing this week.

However, I believe this is the week the Hammond's are suppose to turn themselves over to the Feds. I know there have been murmurings about this going on since November, maybe people just thought there would have been some kind of solution prior to this week? Last option type thing.