It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
BREAKING: Armed militia occupies forest reserve HQ in Oregon, call ‘US patriots’ to arms
page: 16share:
a reply to: Sremmos80
The BLM has wanted their land for ages, please examine things a bit deeper before drawing conclusions.
Double jeopardy definitely is a very grey area but in this case I would say the judge that did the first ruling was definitely best informed to judge on the matter.
The BLM has wanted their land for ages, please examine things a bit deeper before drawing conclusions.
Double jeopardy definitely is a very grey area but in this case I would say the judge that did the first ruling was definitely best informed to judge on the matter.
a reply to: Balans
isn`t that the whole reasoning behind creating mandatory sentencing, so that there is a uniform minimum sentence for the same crime and to prevent local judges from imposing widely different sentences for the same crime in different jurisdictions?
The judge thought he had the right to reduce a mandatory sentence but he was overruled by a higher court, being overruled by a higher court happens a lot but I`m not so sure that taking up arms to protest the higher courts ruling is the best way to go.
isn`t that the whole reasoning behind creating mandatory sentencing, so that there is a uniform minimum sentence for the same crime and to prevent local judges from imposing widely different sentences for the same crime in different jurisdictions?
The judge thought he had the right to reduce a mandatory sentence but he was overruled by a higher court, being overruled by a higher court happens a lot but I`m not so sure that taking up arms to protest the higher courts ruling is the best way to go.
When I first heard about this the following came to mind and ultimately what I believe will happen:
The Hammonds, did indeed light the fires, but not for the reasons they stated, lying to the authorities, and ultimately causing more damage and costing the tax payers a lot of money. And doing such while there was a burn ban, along with the cases of drought going on as well, the people of that area are not so sure that they are not guilty, and a jury did find them guilty of Arson.
Now after the trial and they were sentenced to 5 years in prison, the Militias and part of the Bundy family are showing up to protest and stir up trouble there in Burns Or. This is not going to go well, and here is why:
Unlike the standoff with the Bundy Ranch in Nevada, the militia’s nor the Hammond’s have the support of the local population. That area of the country, has ranches and a lot of farming that happens in that area. Any sort of fire could cause a far greater disaster for the region and the people that live in that area. Based off of what I am hearing, the threshold point for support is not there, and the militia’s and all of those who decided to take that action, may have bitten off more than they are capable of handling. And it will be a waiting game, with the federal government holding onto the cards.
If I was in charge of the operation, I would cut the electricity and the water going to that building, turning it all off. Set up a permiter around the building, and then sit back and wait. No power or water, means no chance of surviving. And offer those inside a way out, via the federal court system.
The point is this: They are breaking the law, local, state and federal laws are being violated, and this time the US Federal government can not simply choose to ignore or back down. Personally I think to add pressure onto simply up the bear, ante and go back out to the Bundy Ranch, forcing they to decide which has greater weight, those in Oregon or those in Nevada.
The Hammonds, did indeed light the fires, but not for the reasons they stated, lying to the authorities, and ultimately causing more damage and costing the tax payers a lot of money. And doing such while there was a burn ban, along with the cases of drought going on as well, the people of that area are not so sure that they are not guilty, and a jury did find them guilty of Arson.
Now after the trial and they were sentenced to 5 years in prison, the Militias and part of the Bundy family are showing up to protest and stir up trouble there in Burns Or. This is not going to go well, and here is why:
Unlike the standoff with the Bundy Ranch in Nevada, the militia’s nor the Hammond’s have the support of the local population. That area of the country, has ranches and a lot of farming that happens in that area. Any sort of fire could cause a far greater disaster for the region and the people that live in that area. Based off of what I am hearing, the threshold point for support is not there, and the militia’s and all of those who decided to take that action, may have bitten off more than they are capable of handling. And it will be a waiting game, with the federal government holding onto the cards.
If I was in charge of the operation, I would cut the electricity and the water going to that building, turning it all off. Set up a permiter around the building, and then sit back and wait. No power or water, means no chance of surviving. And offer those inside a way out, via the federal court system.
The point is this: They are breaking the law, local, state and federal laws are being violated, and this time the US Federal government can not simply choose to ignore or back down. Personally I think to add pressure onto simply up the bear, ante and go back out to the Bundy Ranch, forcing they to decide which has greater weight, those in Oregon or those in Nevada.
Shut off the electricity and water to the site. If they want to live off the land, let them do so.
a reply to: sdcigarpig
Agreed. I predict a bad ending. They have (who knows) how much manpower,weaponry and ammo. If they've been planning this for a long time, they should be well stocked.
FBI has just joined the game. It will be sloppy & ugly.
Breaking news on Burns, OR: www.breakingnews.com...
Agreed. I predict a bad ending. They have (who knows) how much manpower,weaponry and ammo. If they've been planning this for a long time, they should be well stocked.
FBI has just joined the game. It will be sloppy & ugly.
Breaking news on Burns, OR: www.breakingnews.com...
originally posted by: freemanwalking
a reply to: Xcathdra
Entrapment is where a person acting under the collar of law gets a person to do something they would not ordinarily do. Its not illegal to associate with groups that dont like the US government nor is it against the law to bear arms so im still not sure how this is the government faking something to identify these militiamen.
Would you call it entrapment if there is video evidence of an agent of the federal government helping to plan this cluster?
Informants aren't federal agents, they're regular joes who probably have some kind of charges against them. They agree to feed information to the feds in exchange for a shortened sentence or something. That's why it's not entrapment. They've been doing this with Muslims for a while now.
"We're here to stand up for our brothers and sisters and show the world, show America: You mess with us, you mess with all of us," co-organizer Jeff
Roberts told a gathering before the march.
"This isn't an Oregon problem, this is a national problem, and it's happening everywhere," he said.
I believe they are on thier own. I don't see this happening in my part of the woods & I certainly do not see "occupy BLM Federal buildings" anyplace else.
Schools shut down all next week purposefully. ...
www.latimes.com...
"This isn't an Oregon problem, this is a national problem, and it's happening everywhere," he said.
I believe they are on thier own. I don't see this happening in my part of the woods & I certainly do not see "occupy BLM Federal buildings" anyplace else.
Schools shut down all next week purposefully. ...
www.latimes.com...
originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: liveandlearn
Man that's some BS. Why is the gov't so hell bent on sending them to prison?
Because they burned over 100 acres of public land, in an effort to cover up their poaching, while deliberately intending to cause massive damage - according to witnesses who didn't want any part of it.
The minimal term is five years, but they were given a lighter sentence locally as I understand it, mainly because they just wanted this to all go away and calm down. The family and the militia didn't want that though, so now it's all continued and the federal government has demanded a minimum 5 years.
originally posted by: ReadLeader
a reply to: sdcigarpig
Agreed. I predict a bad ending. They have (who knows) how much manpower,weaponry and ammo. If they've been planning this for a long time, they should be well stocked.
FBI has just joined the game. It will be sloppy & ugly.
The militia has only taken this as an opportunity to act out their revolution fantasies by becoming the new Branch Davidians cult in the woods hoping to start something. They might claim to be prepared but these are really nothing more than overgrown schoolboys fapping over revolution fantasies.
But, the fact that the US govt recognizes the bigger risk of spreading is likely why the media has been so quiet about this while it's been trending on Twitter all day long, they don't want copy cat radical groups around the country breaking out of their bunkers to start snatching up federal land and kicking off their own little revolution fantasies.
The best option right now would be to isolate the group, stop any movement in or out, leave them alone until they get bored. These people like to think they're "survivalists" and "libertarians", but they won't last a month in that building without power, food or running water.
a reply to: Rocker2013
The thing people keep forgetting, they ILLEGALLY poached. Tried to cover... they got themselves I to this mess and it's getting messier by the minute
Just found this link. It actually looks like a set of deer antlers still attached to a skull by the fire. Looking g at this, they sure don't look well enough clad to be there for years...lol
mobile.nytimes.com...://www.google.com/[edit by]edit on 3-1-2016 by ReadLeader because: Link
The thing people keep forgetting, they ILLEGALLY poached. Tried to cover... they got themselves I to this mess and it's getting messier by the minute
Just found this link. It actually looks like a set of deer antlers still attached to a skull by the fire. Looking g at this, they sure don't look well enough clad to be there for years...lol
mobile.nytimes.com...://www.google.com/[edit by]edit on 3-1-2016 by ReadLeader because: Link
originally posted by: ReadLeader
a reply to: Rocker2013
The thing people keep forgetting, they ILLEGALLY poached. Tried to cover... they got themselves I to this mess and it's getting messier by the minute
Exactly, I am all for people protesting against their government for valid reasons, but this is not valid and this is not a protest.
By the very definition of the word this is a terrorist incident. These are armed men with anti-government beliefs and extreme religious opinions, seizing control of a government site, while making threats to kill.
If these men were Muslim this would look like WACO already.
Reading the report from the local Sheriff (I think it was) this was a planned seizure of a federal building intended to spark a revolution and similar actions across the country. That has nothing to do with Bundy, the land, the poaching, this is about a terrorist cell in the US attempting to start a revolution to overthrow the democratically elected government.
Now, we can argue until the cows come home about whether that democratic government is god or bad, successful or failing, needing repair or not... but there is absolutely no denying that attempting to usurp the democratic rights of all free citizens through a violent insurrection for the political goals of a minority of extremists is absolutely terrorism.
This is what I've been saying on here for a long time though, and it's what many of the more conservative posters have been entirely refusing to accept - when you start talking about revolution, especially over ridiculously inconsequential things, you are becoming an extremist worthy of attention.
There's a hell of a lot of self-radicalization going on in the right-wing in the US right now, and most of those becoming more extreme don't even know that's what's happening to them.
It will definitely be interesting to see how this progresses in the coming days, and whether there are any other incidents around the US. I very much doubt there will be, and if there are we probably won't even hear about it
a reply to: ReadLeader
There is doubt about the poaching claim as I read it.
Apparently there is also word that the reason for the poaching charge is because a nephew got in trouble for getting a tattoo, and it was his way to retaliate against one of the guys getting sent to the pokie was to claim poaching.
The reason for the fires as stated was actually to stop a fire made by the BLM to stop a brush fire ignited by lightning strikes from spreading onto their property. This is known as a fire-line
One of the biggest reasons there is so much anger towards the Courts in this case is because they are being set BACK to prison after ALREADY serving their sentence. They have not even been charged with a crime this time. They are being punished twice for a crime that may or may not even have taken place.
"(o) 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."
I will look around and see if I can find the tattoo article, apparently that was the reason for the "estrangement" between the nephew Dusty and the rest of the family.
theconservativetreehouse.com... -hammond-family-persecution/
There is doubt about the poaching claim as I read it.
Apparently there is also word that the reason for the poaching charge is because a nephew got in trouble for getting a tattoo, and it was his way to retaliate against one of the guys getting sent to the pokie was to claim poaching.
The reason for the fires as stated was actually to stop a fire made by the BLM to stop a brush fire ignited by lightning strikes from spreading onto their property. This is known as a fire-line
One of the biggest reasons there is so much anger towards the Courts in this case is because they are being set BACK to prison after ALREADY serving their sentence. They have not even been charged with a crime this time. They are being punished twice for a crime that may or may not even have taken place.
"(o) 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."
I will look around and see if I can find the tattoo article, apparently that was the reason for the "estrangement" between the nephew Dusty and the rest of the family.
theconservativetreehouse.com... -hammond-family-persecution/
a reply to: Punisher75
My bad. I thought I had a source on them illegally poaching. I'll continue to search.
theconservativetreehouse.com... -hammond-family-persecution/
My bad. I thought I had a source on them illegally poaching. I'll continue to search.
theconservativetreehouse.com... -hammond-family-persecution/
edit on 3-1-2016 by ReadLeader because: (no reason given)
a reply to: Punisher75
The only reference I could find in regards to the poaching is in the 2012 transcript. The 2013 Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari has no mention of it as far as I've read.
The only reference I could find in regards to the poaching is in the 2012 transcript. The 2013 Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari has no mention of it as far as I've read.
MR. MATASAR: ... Steven Hammond has some criminal history issues, which I will just ask the court to make a specific finding. We have argued in the memo about the Fish & Wildlife exception to the -- to one of his convictions.
THE COURT: Had you ever heard of a landowner's permit before this case?
MR. MATASAR: I had not, but obviously you have.
THE COURT: Any of the lawyers ever killed an animal on a landowner's permit?
MR. MATASAR: I have not.
THE COURT: Your judge has.
MR. MATASAR: Yes. And as I found as I was looking into the landowner permit rules, everybody else knows about them before I did. So it's quite common, as you know, Your Honor.
THE COURT: It's not common in big cities.
MR. MATASAR: Yes. It's not
edit on 3/1/2016 by Balans because: fixed link
originally posted by: ReadLeader
a reply to: Punisher75
My bad. I thought I had a scource on them illegally poaching. I'll continue to search.
theconservativetreehouse.com... -hammond-family-persecution/
You did very likely read that anyway as that was part of the meta story, however the reason for the sentencing was the claim that the fires were arson. They are being sent back to prison on the charge that they did so as an act of terrorism.
That is kind of the rub, first they are said to start the fire because they are covering up poaching... when they said no it was too keep the fires from their property, the fires the MLM started to stop a fire started by lighting, they were simply charged with arson. (even though all evidence shows that was not even the case)
they serve 3 months get out then the prosecutor and judge sends them right back to prison with no jury trial or anything.
Here is another article on the whole story.
www.superstation95.com...
originally posted by: ReadLeader
a reply to: Rocker2013
The thing people keep forgetting, they ILLEGALLY poached. Tried to cover... they got themselves I to this mess and it's getting messier by the minute
Just found this link. It actually looks like a set of deer antlers still attached to a skull by the fire. Looking g at this, they sure don't look well enough clad to be there for years...lol
mobile.nytimes.com...://www.google.com/[/quo te]
The CNN version: www.cnn.com...
My bet is that the Hammonds really don't want any part of this and the Feds will isolate the occupiers and wait them out. It doesn't appear that such a small building will hold many people and unless they have a large food supply, they won't be able to hold out for long. Isolation and the realization that this is a no-win situation will likely result in most going home, especially when they realize they are being used as pawns by Nevada ranchers with an agenda.
a reply to: pteridine
www.cbsnews.com...
The Bundys are riding the coattails of someone who doesn't want them there.
Your bet about the Hammonds would seem to be correct:
My bet is that the Hammonds really don't want any part of this and the Feds will isolate the occupiers and wait them out.
However, the Hammond family, the Oregon ranchers at the center of the dispute, say they don't want them there, reports CBS affiliate KOIN in Portland, Ore.
www.cbsnews.com...
The Bundys are riding the coattails of someone who doesn't want them there.