Ranchers vs BLM Oregon this time

[phill4paul]

If they want to confront the BLM this looks like a better bet at first glance.

The Bureau of Land Management is in the process of stealing another ranchers land.

Tommy Henderson has already lost land to the BLM and is currently fighting their latest attempt to take his property, “How can BLM come in and say, ‘Hey, this isn’t yours’?” Henderson asked. “… Our family paid taxes for over 100 years on this place. We’ve got a deed to it. But yet they walked in and said it wasn’t ours?”

http://www.truthandaction.org/blm-seizing-116-miles-ranchers-land-moving-texas-oklahoma-border/

The Red River is the boundary between Texas and Oklahoma…or is it?

Byers, Texas along the Red River — The BLM stole 140 acres of the Tommy Henderson ranch thirty years ago. They took his land and paid him absolutely nothing. He sued and lost. Now the BLM is using that court case as precedent to do it again. The problem is, the land they want to seize is property that ranchers have a deed for and have paid taxes on for over a hundred years.

The BLM claims that about 90,000 acres (116 miles along the Red River) have never belonged to Texas in the first place. They will seize the land and it will seriously change the boundaries between the two states.

http://www.americasfreedomfighters....-to-seize-90000-acres-of-texas-ranchers-land/

 

[osan]

I applaud the spirit of this, but question the wisdom. Choosing not only one's battles, but the circumstances to his best advantage is part of smart action. I don't know what to call this move, but "smart" has yet to come to mind. Is there something essential absent from the article? This seems to be making them appear as the aggressors and as thieves. Not saying they are that, but this is likely to be the public perception and without substantial support therefrom, these guys stand to lose in a really spectacularly unpleasant manner.

What am I missing?

 

[osan]

The AUSA (federal prosecutor) has threatened the Hammonds with harsher prison conditions if they associate with the Bundy's, 10 min. in.

Next step: punishing friends and family members for the acts of others. We are being thrown backward into barbarity.

Nice going, America.

 

[osan]

This is going to have to happen eventually, but you have to be smart about it. Phill is right, if it's not about the Hammonds then there are thousands of other times and places this could go down. Pick your battlefield, pick your fight, pick your ingress, pick your egress, pick your campaign, and pick your end game. When you go to do battle, you want to maximize the probability of success by manipulating the variables in your favor. When you have the freedom to pick and choose your time and place, picking one of the least likely routes to victory does not seem wise.

There are dozens of counties in a handful of States with Constitutional Sheriffs who would be inclined to be friendly. Many of those same Counties will also have populations and commissions friendly to the cause, or at least not actually opposed.

This all seems rushed, with no intelligence, no clear plan, and no clear end-game. They appear to have taken a strategic low-ground and acted in a politically indefensible way.

Yes, this is ultimately going to have to happen, but I'm worried that this specific ill advised action is going to set this very cause back by 5 years or more.

^^^^^THIS^^^^^^

Every last word.

 

[JK/SEA]

http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-n...cart_most-read_pacific-northwest-news_article

''He said many would be willing to fight — and die, if necessary — to defend what they see as constitutionally protected rights for states, counties and individuals to manage local lands. ''

 

[Pericles]

This is going to have to happen eventually, but you have to be smart about it. Phill is right, if it's not about the Hammonds then there are thousands of other times and places this could go down. Pick your battlefield, pick your fight, pick your ingress, pick your egress, pick your campaign, and pick your end game. When you go to do battle, you want to maximize the probability of success by manipulating the variables in your favor. When you have the freedom to pick and choose your time and place, picking one of the least likely routes to victory does not seem wise.

There are dozens of counties in a handful of States with Constitutional Sheriffs who would be inclined to be friendly. Many of those same Counties will also have populations and commissions friendly to the cause, or at least not actually opposed.

This all seems rushed, with no intelligence, no clear plan, and no clear end-game. They appear to have taken a strategic low-ground and acted in a politically indefensible way.

Yes, this is ultimately going to have to happen, but I'm worried that this specific ill advised action is going to set this very cause back by 5 years or more.

That right there. This reeks of an opportunist trying to create conflict for what he perceives to be his benefit.

What does occupying a building achieve? If this is part of a plan, then a new General Staff is needed.

 

[Pericles]

If they want to confront the BLM this looks like a better bet at first glance.



http://www.truthandaction.org/blm-seizing-116-miles-ranchers-land-moving-texas-oklahoma-border/


http://www.americasfreedomfighters....-to-seize-90000-acres-of-texas-ranchers-land/

They are not at the Red River because other militias and supporters have the relationships with the land owners and the "leaders" of the Oregon effort would not be in charge of activity at the Red River.

 

[Pericles]

Insane. The federal government annually burns hundreds of thousands of acres in burnout operations and Proscribed burns. Many have escaped and burned homes and business of which it takes years for people to get compensated yet no one has ever gone to prison.

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Errors-Caused-Lewiston-Fire-Trainee-planned-2918200.php

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerro_Grande_Fire

Its not illegal when the government does it.

 

[Dr.3D]

Its not illegal when the government does it.

Of course, it's only illegal when they want to get other people in trouble.

 

[raystone]

Can someone archive this webpage, because the Oregon Farm Bureau will likely remove it soon. The 8,000 member Oregon Farm Bureau unequivocally supported the Hammonds in October, including stating "This prosecution will have a chilling effect across the West among ranchers..." Now, the Oregon Farm Bureau president is running for national farm bureau president. He won't want to be called out on this.


http://www.tsln.com/news/18551282-113/story.html

SALEM, OREGON, October 7, 2015 –

Statement by Oregon Farm Bureau President Barry Bushue on sentencing of Steve and Dwight Hammond:

“Today two Oregon ranchers were sentenced to five years in federal prison under terrorism statutes for setting preventative fires on their own land. We are gravely disappointed at this outcome.

“Elderly Harney County rancher Dwight Hammond and his son, Steven, a former OFB Board member and Harney County Farm Bureau president, have already served time in federal prison for their mistakes and paid their debt to society for the less-than-140 acres of BLM land that was accidentally impacted by the fires.

“This is an example of gross government overreach, and the public should be outraged.

“Today’s verdict is also hypocritical given BLM’s own harm to public and private grazing lands, which goes without consequence. It is unjust. OFB worked on this case quietly behind the scenes with BLM through the spring and summer. That diligent diplomatic effort was fruitless.

“This prosecution will have a chilling effect across the West among ranchers, foresters, and others who rely on federal allotments and permits. It will harm the positive relationship many ranchers and organizations have worked to forge with the BLM, and undermine the cooperative spirit most ranchers have brought to the bureau in helping the health of the range.

“Please join Farm Bureau and declare your support for Steve and Dwight Hammond. Join over 2,600 other citizens from across the country and show BLM that this extreme abuse of power will not go unnoticed and is shameful. Sign the petition at www.savethehammonds.com. This must never happen again.

“OFB will continue to work to bring public and policymaker attention to this case.”

Comment from federal attorney Billy Williams:

“We all know the devastating effects that are caused by wildfires. Fires intentionally and illegally set on public lands, even those in a remote area, threaten property and residents and endanger firefighters called to battle the blaze” stated Acting U.S. Attorney Billy Williams. “Congress sought to ensure that anyone who maliciously damages United States’ property by fire will serve at least 5 years in prison. These sentences are intended to be long enough to deter those like the Hammonds who disregard the law and place fire fighters and others in jeopardy.”

Oregon Farm Bureau President Barry Bushue’s response:

“BLM accused the Hammonds of endangering lives, but a jury found they did not. Saying they ‘intentionally’ set fire to public land or threatened lives is not what the jury concluded. Federal attorney Billy Williams is wrong in his overblown statements in court yesterday. But he has helped frame the debate as we start to look at BLM’s own actions. If Williams’ rhetoric is the standard, BLM will have a lot of explaining to do, far beyond what they’ve done in this case,” said OFB President Barry Bushue.

–Oregon Farm Bureau

 

[Pericles]

The Hammonds explicitly do not want it. In which case they are totally right to sit it out. Without the support of the victim this action can only hurt and not help. OK's are right.

There is some missing background here. Freedom Outpost is run by a guy name Gary Hunt who is part of the committee of States / Safety organization he heads. Ryan Payne is his designated militia commander in an attempt to build a nationwide militia.

Part of that effort is that any organization (Oathkeepers) or militia that do not follow their lead is denigrated.

 

[angelatc]

Insane. The federal government annually burns hundreds of thousands of acres in burnout operations and Proscribed burns. Many have escaped and burned homes and business of which it takes years for people to get compensated yet no one has ever gone to prison.

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Errors-Caused-Lewiston-Fire-Trainee-planned-2918200.php

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerro_Grande_Fire

Before this story became such a hotbed of controversy, the local papers were very sympathetic - controlled burns were being done on private land for the same reason. I won't pretend to understand it or even remember the details, but they reported it as if was just part of the farming cycle.

 

[Badger Paul]

"Now, if you want to discuss why some stories catch support like this, and why some don't, I'm sure anyone's guess would be as good as the next guy's, but I'm thinking you can rule out race."

No, I will not because there's a double standard and you know there's one. Did you support the black students at Missouri or Princeton taking control of buildings or disrupting classes or conducting a strike before a football game? Do you like it when Black Lives Matter blocks an intersection and holds back traffic? I'm not just talking about Oathkeepers. I seriously doubt there is a lot of support for such actions among the militia community, not too mention the wider white community for it either.

But takeover a federal building with guns drawn? Hey, yeah! We're just exercising our constitutional rights while those BLM types need to be put in jail or expelled from school.

I'm tired of this crap. If there was a broad-based, multi-racial movement against police abuse and corruption and federal overreach it would be beautiful. But no, there isn't. One group demands the other be prosecuted to fullest extent of the law and then insists it has the right to break such law whenever it wishes because its "unconstitutional." So is being shot in the back trying to flee police, but I don't see the militias taking over police stations do I? No, we know what you hate and it's the federal government head by the not 100 percent white person in the White House with the foreign sounding name who might be a Muslim and may never have been a citizen to begin with. Certainly the Bundys didn't sieze any federal buildings when Bush II was President even though the dispute they've had with government goes back to 1993!

 

[roho76]

When the BLM shows up and realized that it might mean their lives upholding some stupid government objective they may not pursue this. I don't understand the mentality here. This may not be the best way to handle this but what are we supposed to do? Keep getting trampled on while begging for mercy???? These people never sleep and they never stop trying to ruin everything in their path. It's about fucking time someone says enough.

 

[Dr.3D]

"Now, if you want to discuss why some stories catch support like this, and why some don't, I'm sure anyone's guess would be as good as the next guy's, but I'm thinking you can rule out race."

No, I will not because there's a double standard and you know there's one. Did you support the black students at Missouri or Princeton taking control of buildings or disrupting classes or conducting a strike before a football game? Do you like it when Black Lives Matter blocks an intersection and holds back traffic? I'm not just talking about Oathkeepers. I seriously doubt there is a lot of support for such actions among the militia community, not too mention the wider white community for it either.

But takeover a federal building with guns drawn? Hey, yeah! We're just exercising our constitutional rights while those BLM types need to be put in jail or expelled from school.

I'm tired of this crap. If there was a broad-based, multi-racial movement against police abuse and corruption and federal overreach it would be beautiful. But no, there isn't. One group demands the other be prosecuted to fullest extent of the law and then insists it has the right to break such law whenever it wishes because its "unconstitutional." So is being shot in the back trying to flee police, but I don't see the militias taking over police stations do I? No, we know what you hate and it's the federal government head by the not 100 percent white person in the White House with the foreign sounding name who might be a Muslim and may never have been a citizen to begin with. Certainly the Bundys didn't sieze any federal buildings when Bush II was President even though the dispute they've had with government goes back to 1993!

Yeah, that's gotta be it, it's because Obama is kinda black.

 

[tod evans]

"Now, if you want to discuss why some stories catch support like this, and why some don't, I'm sure anyone's guess would be as good as the next guy's, but I'm thinking you can rule out race."

No, I will not because there's a double standard and you know there's one. Did you support the black students at Missouri or Princeton taking control of buildings or disrupting classes or conducting a strike before a football game? Do you like it when Black Lives Matter blocks an intersection and holds back traffic? I'm not just talking about Oathkeepers. I seriously doubt there is a lot of support for such actions among the militia community, not too mention the wider white community for it either.

But takeover a federal building with guns drawn? Hey, yeah! We're just exercising our constitutional rights while those BLM types need to be put in jail or expelled from school.

I'm tired of this crap. If there was a broad-based, multi-racial movement against police abuse and corruption and federal overreach it would be beautiful. But no, there isn't. One group demands the other be prosecuted to fullest extent of the law and then insists it has the right to break such law whenever it wishes because its "unconstitutional." So is being shot in the back trying to flee police, but I don't see the militias taking over police stations do I? No, we know what you hate and it's the federal government head by the not 100 percent white person in the White House with the foreign sounding name who might be a Muslim and may never have been a citizen to begin with. Certainly the Bundys didn't sieze any federal buildings when Bush II was President even though the dispute they've had with government goes back to 1993!

Ummmm,

One group called for more government, government funding, government enforcement, government investigations and special privileges granted by government...

The other is telling government to go away.

 

[Ender]

Before this story became such a hotbed of controversy, the local papers were very sympathetic - controlled burns were being done on private land for the same reason. I won't pretend to understand it or even remember the details, but they reported it as if was just part of the farming cycle.

It was also reported that the land is in much better condition because of the burnings, but that report was not allowed in court.

My take is the Hammonds are accepting the double-dealings of .gov because their families are being threatened. There could be no other reason for not fighting this serious mockery of natural law.

JMHPOV

 

[Badger Paul]

"One group called for more government, government funding, government enforcement, government investigations and special privileges granted by government...
The other is telling government to go away. "

Black Lives Matter says the police ought to go away from them. Aren't police a part of the government? Hmmm?

You're contradictions have screwed up this movement and using RPF boards to forment violence and terrorism and treason is about as far away from Ron Paul as you can get. And don't think Rand is going to come into this situation to save your arses. Remember, you're the (ahem) bad people, fringe types Jesse Benton was talking about. Isn't that right Collins? If the mods don't drop your account, you've damned us all.

Got this from the Gawker comment section to prove my point:

"Black kids get 2 seconds to comply with law enforcement before they’re shot. These guys point guns at federal agents, and nothing happens. Mandatory minimum sentences are all well and fine with these guys when one person has a crack rock, yet not ok when 2 guys start a fire (which some people are saying was to cover evidence of poaching on federal land, but IDK) that destroyed many acres of public land.

 

[Lucille]

http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2016/01/perfect-timing-for-regime-federal.html

Perfect timing for the regime. Federal provocateurs, sociopaths and idiots with a John Brown complex are writing checks that they expect the rest of us to cash in our blood.
[...]
I was first apprised of this a few minutes ago by folks on the ground out in Oregon. They report that Payne, Ritzheimer and every other "tiger-talking" fruit, nut and federal provocateur previously identified from the Bundy standoff were now in possession of the building and daring the Feds to do anything about it. My initial reaction was to observe that at least afterward we'll know who the federal snitches are because they will be the only ones who survive the raid to take back the building. My understanding is that this premeditated action has been condemned by the Oregon Three Percenters and other groups but the fact of the matter is that these people are writing checks that they expect the rest of us to cash in our blood. And the Hammonds themselves are disavowing this action in the strongest terms.

For the regime, this could not come at a better time. The old Roman adage "cui bono" applies here. There is nothing on the talking heads channels as yet, but by Monday, when Obama meets with his Attorney General on the subject of citizen disarmament, you can bet the farm that this will play right into that narrative. Perfect timing. You've got to give the federal handlers of these pukes credit. This is precisely the sort of offensive action on the part of the "militia terrorists" that they needed.
[...]
I'll have updates as I get them, but for now it looks like 2016 is going to start out with a huge propaganda victory for the regime.

http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2016/01/live-feed-from-oregon.html

The collectivists have begun to exploit it: "Right wing militia from Bundy Ranch occupy federal wildlife building in Oregon."

Authorities have not yet commented on the occupation but Zaitz reports that Oregon State Police, the Harney County Sheriff’s Office and the FBI are involved in the developing situation.

"And the FBI are involved in the developing situation." Yeah, both inside and outside the building, you can bet on it.

 

[Ender]

"One group called for more government, government funding, government enforcement, government investigations and special privileges granted by government...
The other is telling government to go away. "

Black Lives Matter says the police ought to go away from them. Aren't police a part of the government? Hmmm?

You're contradictions have screwed up this movement and using RPF boards to forment violence and terrorism and treason is about as far away from Ron Paul as you can get. And don't think Rand is going to come into this situation to save your arses. Remember, you're the (ahem) bad people, fringe types Jesse Benton was talking about. Isn't that right Collins? If the mods don't drop your account, you've damned us all.

Got this from the Gawker comment section to prove my point:

"Black kids get 2 seconds to comply with law enforcement before they’re shot. These guys point guns at federal agents, and nothing happens. Mandatory minimum sentences are all well and fine with these guys when one person has a crack rock, yet not ok when 2 guys start a fire (which some people are saying was to cover evidence of poaching on federal land, but IDK) that destroyed many acres of public land.

If the black kids had guns pointed they would not be shot at, either.

As I said in my above post- the burnings improved THE LAND- BUT THE PICS AND PROOF WERE NOT ALLOWED IN COURT. BML burns the lands constantly and these fires have spread to private land- but hey they are gov so they can do what they want.