Sunday, January 03, 2016

Armed protesters take over wildlife refuge in Oregon -

Armed protesters take over wildlife refuge in Oregon -

"(CNN) A group of armed protesters have taken over a building in a federal wildlife refuge in Oregon, accusing officials of unfairly punishing ranchers who refused to sell their land, a spokesman for the group told CNN. The protesters occupied part of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge near Burns after a march supporting Dwight and Steven Hammond, two ranchers who are convicted of arson. Prosecutors said the Hammonds set the fire, which burned about 130 acres in 2001, to cover up poaching. The father and son were sentenced to five years in prison."


This is like something from The Walking Dead, where groups of armed men take whatever they want, based on some crazy moral code.  Now this is happening in Oregon. And among these "I'm a law unto myself because I have an assault rifle" wanna-be warlords you will find two sons of Cliven Bundy, the squatter on federal land who provoked a standoff with federal authorities in May, 2014.  In that confrontation, people were aiming rifles at federal officers, and the Obama administration made an enormous mistake by letting them get away with it. Now, predictably, they are at it again.  Will the administration back down again, or finally do something about it?  I don't see how people like this can be allowed to arm themselves and take over federal property, and then get away with threatening law enforcement.

The Hammonds are not there. They say they are going to surrender themselves and serve the prison sentence that they deserve.  They slaughtered a herd of deer on federal land and then set a fire that burned 130 acres to cover up their crime, and there were witnesses to that, including the teenager they enlisted to start the fire for them.   They were convicted in a jury trial. So the Hammond case really has nothing to do with this so-called protest. These militia thugs just want to make the Obama administration back down again, they are using the Hammond case as a pretext, and I suppose there's a good chance that the administration will do nothing once again, in the hope of avoiding bloodshed. But sooner of later, these people have to be confronted.  Federal lands are for public use, and we can't allow people to take it by force for their own use and profit. That's what Bundy did--he used federal land to graze his cattle for free. The Hammonds used it for poaching. Now the militia goons are squatting in the administration building of a federal wildlife preserve. Enough. And take their guns.

The larger issue here is that people like the Koch brothers want to take federal land for their own use, and it seems that these highly publicized confrontations may be part of that effort.

1 comment:

robert @ colorado hoa . com said...

A few weeks after the Bundy ranch standoff in Nevada (April - May 2014), the Tides Condominium H.O.A. corporation in Florida threatened to foreclose on the home of 73-year old Larry Murphree for displaying an 11 inch x 17 inch American flag on his front porch. If you look closely at the picture on Mr. Murphree’s web site,, you can almost see the flag in question.

Although the fines were paid and the case was supposedly settled in July 2014, it sounded like his property was still under threat of foreclosure as of October 2014.

[04:46] "Last night — you’re the first to hear this — last night, I was served with a 125 page foreclosure" [04:54]

After that, this story just sort of disappeared off the radar of whatever it is that calls itself an H.O.A. reform movement. Maybe Mr. Murphree prevailed, or maybe he's homeless right now. I have no idea. But that's not my point here.

Regardless of one’s opinions about the Bundy ranch standoff or whatever is happening in Oregon right now — or even past incidents such as the gun-totin’ Black Panthers in the California state capitol — where were these tea partiers, patriots, militia groups, III per centers, or whatever it they call themselves now, when Mr. Murphree’s property rights were being threatened by a private corporation? Why are these armed groups never outraged enough to help home owners resist the privatized oppression so common in America today?