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: 33
87
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 05:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion

originally posted by: Balans
I can not understand that many of you find it normal for the Hammonds to be resentenced when it is clear that the judge that was most intimate with the case could not with a clear conscience subject them to a 5-years minimum. Again, a judge with 39 years experience in sentencing....


THE COURT (THE HON. MICHAEL R. HOGAN, JUDGE PRESIDING): I am not going to apply the mandatory minimum and because, to me, to do so under the Eighth Amendment would result in a sentence which is grossly disproportionate to the severity of the offenses here. And with regard to the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, this sort of conduct could not have been conduct intended under that statute. When you say, you know, what if you burn sagebrush in the suburbs of Los Angeles where there are houses up those ravines? Might apply. Out in the wilderness here, I don't think that's what the Congress intended. And in addition, it just would not be -- would not meet any idea I have of justice, proportionality. I am not supposed to use the word "fairness" in criminal law. I know that I had a criminal law professor a long time ago yell at me for doing that. And I don't do that. But this -- it would be a sentence which would shock the conscience to me.




Source please.

Case transcripts




posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 06:19 PM
link   
It would be bad if all the land went to the states especially out west, the state would end up selling it to the private sectors and it would become just like the East Coast. Out east you hunt on hunting leases, fenced and owned by someone. If you cross that fence, your trespassing. I love the BLM land, I can go where I please, see nature as it is, and not have to see ugly Posted signs, and no trespassing signs all over.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 07:10 PM
link   
This all stemmed from a controlled burn, this is a normal practice with farmers. It was on BLM land but it was land that the Hammonds used since 1870 and were paying for use of. I don't think this falls into "terrorist" activity AND PLEASE, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, research Lower North Fork Fire Colorado. Employee's of the Forrester's department set a controlled burn that destroyed 27 homes, an elderly couple and 20,000 acres. They were not punished and the State of Colorado limit the amount that could be sued for to 600k...this is between ALL 27 home owners and anyone else that felt damaged.
We saw this saw underhandedness with the Clive Bundy ranch in Nevada not long ago...oddly they are related (father/son) this country has simply forgotten who wears the pants...I say go malitia and Godspeed.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 07:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Hr2burn

My first thought on that subject was if it worked, why be upset. Did they demonstrate they were more capable than the government? I could see the need for not just anyone to do this but the proof is in the result.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 07:51 PM
link   
a reply to: ReadLeader

There is more information that is coming out and it shows stuff in a bad light.

The first hing is that many of those there, and especially Amon Bundy, have received money from the Federal government. In fact, it has come out that he has received personally 500 thousand dollars to start and run a small business, from the very government that he protesting against. And for those who are ranchers, they get money from the federal government as well.

And that leads to this question: If they are all hard working people, how is it that they are out there doing this action, where is their money coming from?

But beyond that, apparently they did not plan on this very well, as they have been appealing for people to send food and water to help them out. Funny thing is that they fail to realize that all of their communications and internet activities are being monitored by the very people they are protesting. And things are starting to show it degrading, as they are wanting more people to come in and give them a break.

On the Federal and local government side, they have to just wait, and are contemplating cutting the phone and power out there, that will make things far worse for them while out there. And it appears as more and more people in the local population are getting irritated with them and the threshold to support them or get the government to yield is not there. Unlike Nevada, where the Bundy's had the support of a significant population on their side, this time, no one is wanting to really support them. No political figures are speaking for them, and major militias are distancing themselves from this, even the Hammonds do not want their assistance. It is only a matter of time, and the local sherriff and the 6 deputies won't have to do anything.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 08:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Hr2burn
This all stemmed from a controlled burn, this is a normal practice with farmers.


Except their own family member testified against them at trial contradicting that claim.


originally posted by: Hr2burn It was on BLM land but it was land that the Hammonds used since 1870 and were paying for use of..


Pretty hard for that to be true as the Hammonds bought their ranch in the twentieth century and in 1870 that land belonged to the Paiute Indians,



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 08:08 PM
link   
a reply to: DelMarvel

Why would someone testify against their own family?

Explain that one for me.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 08:15 PM
link   
Lookout everyone, there is new beta on the Oregon occupation happening now - it's going to get ugly soon.

BREAKING - Special Ops assigned to Bundy Oregon occupation.




posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 09:10 PM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

He was a teenager with some severe mental issues who got mad at the family for personal reasons (like most teenagers do at one time or another) and was seeking "revenge" on people who were trying to help him. BLM lawyers convinced him to testify. It's a bit like the DARE program where the cops get kids to report their parents' behavior, never realizing the future repercussions of their anger and revenge.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 09:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mansquito
Lookout everyone, there is new beta on the Oregon occupation happening now - it's going to get ugly soon.

BREAKING - Special Ops assigned to Bundy Oregon occupation.



I just found my copy of this warning from Mr. Rhodes and checked here to see if anyone posted it. This may well turn lethal.
Please make sure to read the Oath Keepers statement on the standoff at the bottom of the warning.
edit on 5-1-2016 by tweetie because: added commentary



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 09:34 PM
link   
Oregon Public Broadcasting has a few updates on the situation in Burns and out at the Federal Refuge.


The FBI is handling a criminal case against the armed men occupying the refuge since Saturday, and has told Ward that the men will face charges.


He (the sheriff) said contrary to some anonymously sourced news reports, power had not been cut at the refuge headquarters.

Sheriff Ward went on to state the following:

Ward said in the months prior to the occupation, Bundy’s group had made a number of people who work for the Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service feel uncomfortable, following them or their family members around and photographing their homes.

In a county with a population of fewer than 8,000, most people know or are related to someone who works for the federal government, Ward said.

He said hostility toward federal employees is taking a toll on the entire community.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 10:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: DelMarvel

Why would someone testify against their own family?

Explain that one for me.


Because he was physically abused by them.

www.thedailybeast.com...



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 10:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: diggindirt
a reply to: onequestion

He was a teenager with some severe mental issues who got mad at the family for personal reasons (like most teenagers do at one time or another) and was seeking "revenge" on people who were trying to help him. BLM lawyers convinced him to testify. It's a bit like the DARE program where the cops get kids to report their parents' behavior, never realizing the future repercussions of their anger and revenge.



The wounds came to the attention of the school and authorities and the Hammonds confessed to what happened.

www.thedailybeast.com...



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 10:10 PM
link   
This is going to get ugly.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 10:50 PM
link   
Oath Keeper statement:

Short Oath Keepers Statement on this Standoff

I will post a longer statement later, but for now, here is a brief statement on this situation, in general:

Oath Keepers adamantly opposes the armed takeover of the Malheur Wildlife Refuge. This is not in keeping with the moral imperative of only using force in defense when people’s lives are at stake, as at Bundy Ranch in 2014. In this case, neither the Hammonds nor their neighbors were in imminent threat of being murdered, and neither the Hammonds nor their neighbors asked for any form of armed standoff. In fact, they oppose it. This is being done by outsiders who mislead and deceived locals, deceived the Hammonds, and deceived the patriot movement by luring them in with a peaceful rally and then attempting to rope them into a premeditated, manufactured armed standoff. Both Ammon Bundy and Ryan Payne (who we suspect is an agent provocateur) told the locals in the Committee of Safety, at a public town hall meeting on December 15, that they, the locals on the committee, would be making the decisions on what was to be done, how, and when. That was a lie, as they were already staging their men and supplies in the area to takeover the wildlife refuge, and had already planned out this takeover of the federal facility at the Malheur Wildlife Refuge. By doing this, they have given Obama the best New Years present he could hope for – an example of militia movement/patriot aggression, which gives up the high ground while also having the least credibility and support from the locals possible, after lying to them, and also the least support from the patriot community, who were also blind-sided by Ammon and Ryan Payne.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 10:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Olivine



In a county with a population of fewer than 8,000, most people know or are related to someone who works for the federal government, Ward said.


Could threats to their jobs be one reason the people in the community don't show support for their neighbor and don't want to rock the boat? It would not be the first time this has happened.
Could the school systems be lined up on the side of the tyrants also? For good reason? Just imagine how much they could lose in funding if their system was put under "audit" suddenly? This "stand-off" is thirty miles from the nearest town. Why on earth would the schools feel the need to close because of an incident half an hour away in the middle of the wilderness. Take a look at these locations on Google Earth....

These are exactly the same tactics used by the Tennessee Valley Authority when they "acquired" the land now known as Land Between the Lakes National Recreation Area. Wipe out the viable businesses in the area. Offer jobs to those who do not stand up against the tyrants. Show the bankers how much money they're going to make from thousands of people having to sell their land for less than they can replace it. Sell off the assets to the highest bidder and restrict use of the land through regulation. Promise the moon and deliver the whirlwind if a peep of a protest begins.
If threats and coercion don't work---resort to force.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 11:19 PM
link   
a reply to: diggindirt
I am quite sure more is likely going on then meets the eye. Just look at the google map of the area, and there is quite literally nothing for miles, the whole wildlife refute is mostly just brush and dessert, and the closest towns to malhuer national forest is a town called Seneca, population 199 people.

And Burns Oregon which looks to be one of the bigger cities in the area has a population of 2,728 people were this building is supposed to be occupied by these militia men and it is still a bit farther out then the wildlife forest is located at, and it aint much of a forest either more like a few trees here then sand and brush for miles then a few more trees. And the place they have occupied is suposed to be somewere 50 milles from Burns, which would put them in somewere in all that brush i take it, as the whole town is only 3.55 square miles.

So they have occupied some building quite literally in the middle of nowhere. You know what? If they did not advertise themselves and make a scene I don't think the towns people would even know they are there. And sure as hell the media would not know. But hey, hopefully they wont shoot up those 10 plants and brush there as that is all the habitable foodstuff for the local animals have for miles, even Malheur National Wildlife Refuge is 36 miles away from this Burns town.


Even though it was supposed to be a wildlife reservation because of the turtles and such, well i think there is nothing but rattlesnakes and cattle wondering around out there, that and maybe a coyote or two, oh and prospectors and geologists and you know what follows after them.

I drove through Oregon before some of those tracts of land which are less of dessert and less arid even if thousand of people all of a sudden showed up and decided to live there. Nobody would even know they exist not even the federal government because unless they have business there they wont even bother sending people there they would have no clue on who is there and why. Unless off course there is something on said land that is valuable to somebody somewhere. Then they would make a big deal of it.

Even here in Washington I have drove in summers to like places which had much more bodies of water and sustained more wildlife, you litterally have to drive at least 5 hours from Seattle, then hit gravel and drive another hour, then hit bush and brush and drive another 30 minutes and while your doing that you see about 30 cows grazing on a bush or two before you hit the lake, which is 20X bigger then any body of water in that area in Oregon. And even in all that the only people there are campers, people flying there paragliders off the cliffs and offcourse the rattlesnakes. If anybody were to try to occupy any spot of that land nobody would even notice, and they would likely get bored or starve after a while. # for all I know there could have been hermits in the area somewhere but even if I looked on foot I would not find them I I searched for months.


This whole thing is quite hilarious, they have occupied nothing, in the middle of nowhere, its like something you would see in a monthy python sketch. Militia men, special interests, government officials, and a big hoopla about people taking over some prime grazing land which is really not all that prime in grazing or in feeding livestock. So who knows what the big deal is all about. But there must be something or else so many people would not be making so much noise over it.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 11:24 PM
link   
a reply to: diggindirt

You got to pick your battles carefully for sure. Some picks are better than others is all I have to say about this situation. Hope they brought their long johns and plenty of them MREs. This sh# is about to get real for these folks hold up there.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: galadofwarthethird

Thanks for some perspective.



posted on Jan, 5 2016 @ 11:29 PM
link   
a reply to: diggindirt

Why would they close the schools if they are 50 miles away that doesn't even make sense?

Is there a local here to verify that as fact and o justify that seemingly assanine response?



new topics

top topics



 
87
<< 30  31  32    34  35  36 >>

log in

join