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.

 

Militia takes over Malheur National Wildlife Refuge headquarters

page: 1
13
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 11:35 PM
link   


The Bundy family of Nevada joined with hard-core militiamen Saturday to take over the headquarters of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, vowing to occupy the remote federal outpost 50 miles southeast of Burns for years.

The occupation came shortly after an estimated 300 marchers – militia and local citizens both – paraded through Burns to protest the prosecution of two Harney County ranchers, Dwight Hammond Jr. and Steven Hammond, who are to report to prison on Monday.

Militia takes over Malheur National Wildlife Refuge headquarters

The most recent update I can find on this from approximately 15 minutes ago, states that the situation has multiple agencies currently working on a solution, asking people to stay out of the area.

From what I can gather, it seems like this group is largely not only protesting the prosecution of the Hammond ranchers, but also they seem to be disputing the actions of the federal government relating to the Malheur forest/wildlife refuge.

They also seem to be saying that they plan on using this building as a base for 'years', though I'm really not sure how they intend to achieve this, given the essentially unlimited resources of the federal government.

Either way, I doubt this will end well.




posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 11:38 PM
link   



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 11:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

I searched and looked at the entire page of threads here - and yet nothing recent appeared. Sorry.



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 11:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Inannamute

My apologies, I am really coming off rude tonight. Please don't take it personally.



posted on Jan, 2 2016 @ 11:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

I went back and looked at the forum thread, unless I'm completely blind, it's not there. Even screencapped what I see and the thread 5 posts below mine is from 2 days ago. The one you linked does not appear for me.

I would post the screencap but god knows how ATS does images anymore



posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 12:06 AM
link   
One thread is in BAN, the other is in Current Events, so both are allowed to remain open and continue. Please stick to the topic at hand from now.



posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 12:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Inannamute

its that one . BREAKING: Armed militia occupies forest reserve HQ in Oregon, call ‘US patriots’ to arms



posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 12:18 AM
link   
Well to catch you up here, it certainly is a protestable cause. Federal double jeopardy laws are at stake if this can be carried out.

The defendant may not be punished twice for the same offense. In certain circumstances, however, a sentence may be increased. It has been held that sentences do not have the same "finality" as acquittals, and may therefore be reviewed by the courts. Sentence increases may not, however, be made once the defendant has already begun serving his term of imprisonment.

The prosecution may not seek capital punishment in the retrial if the jury did not impose it in the original trial. The reason for this exception is that before imposing the death penalty the jury has to make several factual determinations and if the jury does not make these it is seen as the equivalent of an acquittal of a more serious offense.

In Arizona v. Rumsey, 467 U.S. 203 (1984), a judge had held a separate hearing after the jury trial to decide if the sentence should be death or life imprisonment, in which he decided that the circumstances of the case did not permit death to be imposed. On appeal, the judge's ruling was found to be erroneous. However, even though the decision to impose life instead of death was based on an erroneous interpretation of the law by the judge, the conclusion of life imprisonment in the original case constituted an acquittal of the death penalty and thus death could not be imposed upon a subsequent trial. Even though the acquittal of the death penalty was erroneous in that case, the acquittal must stand.



posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 01:13 AM
link   
I've seen this movie before, there will be talk of the 2nd amendment and standing up for rights against Government tyranny then when the real men show up with guns, tanks and well trained military the cowards back down like always.

Forget all this nonsense about standing up against your Government, you will be labeled a terrorist and shot on sight. You cannot fight this system now its too big and too powerful, we need it to go financially broke first and when they all go home because they aren't getting paid then maybe perhaps then you exersize your rights a citizen. Until then you will be nothing but cannon fodder.



posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 01:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: mazzroth
I've seen this movie before, there will be talk of the 2nd amendment and standing up for rights against Government tyranny then when the real men show up with guns, tanks and well trained military the cowards back down like always.


You mean like Waco, Ruby Ridge and the Bundy Ranch?



posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 01:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Punisher75

originally posted by: mazzroth
I've seen this movie before, there will be talk of the 2nd amendment and standing up for rights against Government tyranny then when the real men show up with guns, tanks and well trained military the cowards back down like always.


You mean like Waco, Ruby Ridge and the Bundy Ranch?

Exactly, I don't like it one bit but its reality. I think I will explain further as most times in here I have to put it in laymans terms. There was all this talk back in the day with those events of the Militiamen movement all arming up and going to help....didn't happen in either of those 3 cases. the ones with the death wish got zero help from the outside. The talk was all talk and no action, I guess no one wanted to die for the cause.
edit on 3-1-2016 by mazzroth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 01:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: mazzroth

originally posted by: Punisher75

originally posted by: mazzroth
I've seen this movie before, there will be talk of the 2nd amendment and standing up for rights against Government tyranny then when the real men show up with guns, tanks and well trained military the cowards back down like always.


You mean like Waco, Ruby Ridge and the Bundy Ranch?

Exactly, I don't like it one bit but its reality.


What I mean is no one left, any of those things when the big boys showed up. LOL



posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 02:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Punisher75

Yeah true, kudos to them for staying the path..but it cost them their lives for minimal gains. Where were the reserves ? sitting at home drinking beer watching it all unfold on Fox.



posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 02:46 AM
link   
a reply to: mazzroth

No idea, where they were, I think its like everything else in life, no one does much of anything until it effects them personally.



posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 03:05 AM
link   
Its about how much you have invested in the fight, if it was your sister or brother you would die for the cause but maybe your cousins not so much. I seriously suggest we all just wait around until the Governments are all broke, then revolution is possible and eventually inevitable.



posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 03:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: mazzroth
Its about how much you have invested in the fight, if it was your sister or brother you would die for the cause but maybe your cousins not so much.


Ye between that and no one wanting to be the first to get shot. Its kinda like a fist fight you know? Alot of times there is a bit of pushing and shoving cause no one really wants to get punched and no one really wants to be there but eventually someone takes it on the chin and its all down hill from there.



posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 03:12 AM
link   
I'm still waiting for a catalyst for the second US Civil war, this could be it but I suspect its going to be tripped by the blacklivesmatter scenario. Nothing unites people more than skin and religion.



posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 03:16 AM
link   
a reply to: mazzroth

I personally don't suspect it to amount to much, at least so far as any Civil War, especially this close to an election. People will sit back and say, "No need to start fighting just yet, my candidate will come along and fix this once they get into office. LOL
edit on 3-1-2016 by Punisher75 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 10:27 AM
link   
a reply to: Inannamute From your link:

"Neither man would say how many people are in the building or whether they are armed. Ryan Bundy said there were no hostages, but the group is demanding that the Hammonds be released and the federal government relinquish control of the Malheur National Forest.

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.

"The best possible outcome is that the ranchers that have been kicked out of the area, then they will come back and reclaim their land, and the wildlife refuge will be shut down forever and the federal government will relinquish such control," he said. "What we're doing is not rebellious. What we're doing is in accordance with the Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land."

The rationale for this is along the same lines as the "unconstitutional income tax" reasoning that has many armchair legal scholars in jail. The Hammonds will not be released and the Federal Government will not give up the National Forest. This probably seemed like a good idea to many at the time but that should wear off in the light of day. The Government will likely just wait things out as protesters realize that there won't be any action unless the protesters initiate it and those who are smart will go home. The Government will cut off supplies and traffic in and out and then issue a leave now or be prosecuted order. That will be the turning point and I'll bet most will leave, especially those who aren't ranchers and are being used as fodder under the "constitution" guise promoted by the Bundy clan and other ranchers. The hard core will stay and be arrested and then claim victory after they are fined for trespass and other such. They will say it is because they wanted to show the plight of ranchers and the land grabbing of the Federal Government and rail on about the Constitution and their rights.


This link explains the details www.rollingstone.com...



edit on 1/3/2016 by pteridine because: Added link



posted on Jan, 3 2016 @ 01:31 PM
link   
Who are they armed against, the National Guard?




top topics



 
13
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join