Oregon governor to feds: End occupation at wildlife refuge

www.cnn.com...

Brown publicly vented her frustration Wednesday with the armed group of protesters who've taken over a federal wildlife refuge in Harney County, in the southeastern corner of her state. But she's also fed up with federal officials' response to the occupation and urged them to put an end to it.

"The residents of Harney County have been overlooked and underserved by federal officials' response thus far," Brown said during a news conference. "This spectacle of lawlessness must end. And until Harney County is free of it I will not stop insisting that federal officials enforce the law."

I wonder when the government is going to stop coddling these criminals who think their Wyatt Earp or John Wayne and can do what they want.


Its understood and has been said many times that if these people were anything other than the white the feds and all their artillery would be all over them.


I know they may be worried about another Waco. That’s understandable but no body wants them to go in their and shoot any of these idiots just tell them to get out and arrest them.


Now also no one wants to see any fed shot by these morons so if they have to defend themselves then so be it.


The gov needs to stop coddling these white militia groups and do universal justice.

Absofreakinglutely! At VERY least, any one of those clowns who makes themselves "available" by leaving their holdout - such as Bundy, for instance, who drove into Burns to attend a town meeting - should bloody well be arrested immediately or sooner.

These coddled white boys are the worst of the Entitlement culture.

a reply to: Willtell

Its understood and has been said many times that if these people were anything other than the white the feds and all their artillery would be all over them.

It is understood that way by racists only. We can invent in our racist imaginations what would happen if they were of a different color, but given that no such scenario exists, we can rightly dismiss it as race baiting by those who want to turn it into a matter of race when it clearly isn't.

Hmmm, whilst I certainly understand your misunderstandings of the law I don't think a blood bath of any kind is a good thing. I'm not saying this was the brightest way to go, but in what way to you redress issues like this where the Feds have an interest in it? Well, the court of public opinion. Honestly, they are not looting and shooting.

saveourwildhorses.rallycongress.com...

a reply to: Willtell

Like the universal justice meted out after Ferguson, Mo.? Or Baltimore? Scott free rioting and destruction of public and private property...of course none of that In Oregon, is there?

Where was your cries for 'justice' in those instances? I'd search it if I didn't know I'd be wasting my time...

something bigger going on here.....at the ground floor foundational level......the nice lady could back off .....and at some point.....will someone step up.....( we have a whole host of angels surrounding the happening ).....step up and have a public get together with all involved.....a friendly extended chat.. on tv even...

what about the first judge's opinion.....and then the blm shady modus operandi...like for the last 40 years spitting out over control against miners and what, they want first refusal on the private land....REALLY NOW...that's enough to label them as the major bad actor

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

It is understood that way by racists only. We can invent in our racist imaginations what would happen if they were of a different color, but given that no such scenario exists, we can rightly dismiss it as race baiting by those who want to turn it into a matter of race when it clearly isn't.

Well said.

Personally, my guess is that the occupiers will, eventually, reach a point where they will feel that they have made their point and be ready to go home. I understand their reasoning for the occupation; the federal government has way overstepped itself in so, so many ways.

But, at the same time, overstaying will eventually lead to contradictory ending possibilities.

I remember Waco, just all too well. I was never on the side of the Branch Davidians but... the way it closed was just wrong. Another episode like that and we might as well write-in Stalin or Hitler on the ballot in November... because they'd be the perfect fit.

Is this whole thing about:
1) Unbridled commercial and/or private interests destroying our environment and public places and thus needing to be controlled
2) An unbridled government which controls every facet of our lives and never loses an opportunity to tax us into servitude

If it's the former then it's painfully clear these "occupiers" are at best vigilantes, at worst criminals, trying to justify their own insolence and exploitation of the land. If it's the latter then these "occupiers" are protesters.

Is the truth somewhere in the middle?

I know some fisherman who would make similar complaints about the government, they just wouldn't join with a militia like htis. There're all kind of working people who feel taxed to death. So why did Bundy and these people join with a militia?

The two things I borught up are also along party lines. Republicans don't like taxes and government, so they might find themselves more friendly to the occupiers. Democrats are fond of taxes and government, by comparison, so for them this is insufferable and it's clear to them the occupiers should be arrested.

These're the htoughts in my mind since this started.

Don't let anybody or anything in, wait for them to give up and arrest them as they come out.

If you saw their hilariously long list of supplies they needed, they are not prepared at all.

a reply to: jonnywhite

With all due respect, this is about wealthy ranchers who want to graze their cattle for free to boost their own personal bottom line. They dont care about anything but that. The Bundys are Sovereign Citizens and part of a fringe of LDS Mormonism.

Hey lots of white hate in the first few posts?

At least they aren't burning down cities and randomly killing police officers!

God you people...

originally posted by: Leonidas
a reply to: jonnywhite

With all due respect, this is about wealthy ranchers who want to graze their cattle for free to boost their own personal bottom line. They dont care about anything but that. The Bundys are Sovereign Citizens and part of a fringe of LDS Mormonism.

How are you so sure though? Haven't you heard people complain about taxes before and governemnt overreach? I have. I just don't know which this is. Do the occupiers need to be arrested or the govenrment?

I lean towards arresting the occupiers, but I know many people who sympathize with them, mostly because of politics. Most of them are either republican or conservative politically and already don't like hte government. Thing is, some republicans and conservatives HAVE opposed the occupiers publicly, so it's not like everybody is the same.

a reply to: jonnywhite

Listen them in their own words. The whole Bundy clan is into it. And the Hammonds who they went there to "Defend" know all about it and have totally distanced themselves from the Bundys and want people to know they dont speak for the Hammonds.

The Bundys have co-opted this movement to line their own pockets.

originally posted by: Leonidas
a reply to: jonnywhite

Listen them in their own words. The whole Bundy clan is into it. And the Hammonds who they went there to "Defend" know all about it and have totally distanced themselves from the Bundys and want people to know they dont speak for the Hammonds.

The Bundys have co-opted this movement to line their own pockets.

You also have ot understand Oregon is a very liberal, democrat-leaning state. Anybody who's conservative feels ignored and dismissed here. And Oregon's governor is no exception. She replaced Kitzhaber and is very liberal. He was liberal too, though he was breaking rules and resigned and she became governor. John Kizhaber is still under investigation.

it's a very environmental minded state. I'm confident saying, if any state in the US has a majority opposed to the occupiers, it'd be Oregon.

And yes I'm opposed to the occupiers. But don't for a second believe it stops there.. There're large numbers opposed to our government because they think it's overreachng and taxing too much. At least they don't garner guns and occupy federal buildings. Assuming this all ends peacefully--which I hope it does--the broader problems are far from over.

Between the OP and the first comment specifically making this about the race of the Bundys and their group of people, this thread was discredited at the start.

How disappointing. Race-baiting is ignorance--read the tagline of ATS, OP, and let's deny it, shall we?

just tell them to get out and arrest them

undoubtedly federal officials are waiting for the ice on Lake Malheur to thaw out before they can deploy an amphibious engagement utilizing the leverage gained from Operation Emerald Helm

originally posted by: jonnywhite

And yes I'm opposed to the occupiers. But don't for a second think ther'es no problems in this country. There're large numbers opposed to our government because they think it's overreachng and taxing too much. At least they don't garner guns and occupy federal buildings.

I agree. It is consistent to be opposed to the actions of these guys and acknowledge the problems with the government.

originally posted by: Leonidas

originally posted by: jonnywhite

And yes I'm opposed to the occupiers. But don't for a second think ther'es no problems in this country. There're large numbers opposed to our government because they think it's overreachng and taxing too much. At least they don't garner guns and occupy federal buildings.

I agree. It is consistent to be opposed to the actions of these guys and acknowledge the problems with the government.

Does an extremist muslim make islam bad? Extremism is like a bad fruit--the treee is still good. Is that what these occupiers are? Extremists?

You said Bundy is just a bad guy and that's all this is: Just some bad guys abusing the moment. Do you notice I believe it's more than that? I think they're extremists, but they're part of something bigger which is mcuh more moderate. A number of those militia members involved in the occupation are opposed to the government and believing it's overreaching. One pointed to the arson charges against the Hammonds and believes it's abusive to connect the charges to terrorism. Because they wear guns and occupy a federal building, doesn't mean everything can be swept aside. These things will come up again and again in peaceful protests and debate, especially taxes. No guns, just words. So this is not over even if the occupiers end it today and everybody hwo needs to be arrested is arrested.

a reply to: jonnywhite

What the hell do Muslims have to do with the standoff in Oregon? lol

I dont think you realize that - at least in some measure - I agree with you that the Government is over-reaching. But in this particular instance with these particular people, they are using people's unease with the Feds to further their own cause, and ONLY their own cause.

They have co-opted the movement for their own selfish, money motivated goals and nothing else. You mentioned the Hammonds: They know what these guys are up to and have spoken out against them and have disassociated themselves from this Bundy led farce.

originally posted by: Leonidas
a reply to: jonnywhite

What the hell do Muslims have to do with the standoff in Oregon? lol

I dont think you realize that - at least in some measure - I agree with you that the Government is over-reaching. But in this particular instance with these particular people, they are using people's unease with the Feds to further their own cause, and ONLY their own cause.

They have co-opted the movement for their own selfish, money motivated goals and nothing else. You mentioned the Hammonds: They know what these guys are up to and have spoken out against them and have disassociated themselves from this Bundy led farce.

Then I respectfully submit I disagree--in part--with you. I do not believe they're solely using people's unease with the feds to further their own selfish cause. That would be giving them too much credit. While some of that might be true, I believe they're also like many of us: opposed to government overreach. But they've crossed the line in their misguided ways. They've went from peacefully protesting to occupying a federal building with guns. They've declined the authorities offering them a quick and peaceful exit--or arrest for some. Maybe it's selfishness that made htem cross the line, or ignorance, or, as you say, they were inclined to use people's unease to suit their agenda. Or, as I argued, they're extremists and crossing the line is what extremists do. It really doesn't matter why, since being unlawful is enough on its own, isn't it? Maybe breaking the rules can be ok, but if most of us aren't siding with them, they're in the wrong. We broke the rules when we opposed British rule over us and fought in the years 1775-83, but most of us agreed, meaning we were in the right.