Militia takes over Malheur National Wildlife Refuge headquarters in Oregon

[VaticanAssassin]

They burned 130 acres in 2001 to cover up poaching.

So some say. Odd how they where never charged with poaching...

(i)" In the early fall of 2001, Steven Hammond (Son) called the fire department, informing them that he was going to be performing a routine prescribed burn on their ranch. Later that day he started a prescribed fire on their private property. The fire went onto public land and burned 127 acres of grass. The Hammonds put the fire out themselves. There was no communication about the burn from the federal government to the Hammonds at that time. Prescribed fires are a common method that Native Americans and ranchers have used in the area to increase the health & productivity of the land for many centuries.

(j) In 2006 a massive lightning storm started multiple fires that joined together inflaming the countryside. To prevent the fire from destroying their winter range and possibly their home, Steven Hammond (Son) started a backfire on their private property. The backfire was successful in putting out the lightning fires that had covered thousands of acres within a short period of time. The backfire saved much of the range and vegetation needed to feed the cattle through the winter. Steven’s mother, Susan Hammond said: “The backfire worked perfectly, it put out the fire, saved the range and possibly our home”.

(j1) The next day federal agents went to the Harney County Sheriff’s office and filled a police report making accusation against Dwight and Steven Hammond for starting the backfire. A few days after the backfire a Range-Con from the Burns District BLM office asked Steven if he would meet him in town (Frenchglen) for coffee. Steven accepted. When leaving he was arrested by the Harney County Sheriff Dave Glerup and BLM Ranger Orr. Sheriff Glerup then ordered him to go to the ranch and bring back his father. Both Dwight and Steven were booked and on multiple Oregon State charges. The Harney County District Attorney reviewed the accusation, evidence and charges, and determined that the accusations against Dwight & Steven Hammond did not warrant prosecution and dropped all the charges.

(k) In 2011, 5 years after the police report was taken, the U.S. Attorney Office accused Dwight and Steven Hammond of completely different charges, they accused them of being “Terrorist” under the Federal Antiterrorism Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. This act carries a minimum sentence of five years in prison and a maximum sentence of death. Dwight & Steven’s mug shots were all over the news the next week posing them as “Arsonists”. Susan Hammond (Wife & Mother) said: “I would walk down the street or go in a store, people I had known for years would take extreme measures to avoid"

 

[someoneyouknow]

It's funny. Iranians take over a U.S. embassy and we whine and bitch about them being terrorists and how we should have bombed them into oblivion.

Some anti-government wannabes take over a federal building on federal land, with guns, and morons cheer them on.

Hypocrisy at its best.

If they want the building as a base of operations, as they have stated, give it to them. Then put a ring of soldiers armed to the teeth around it and seal it off for six months. No one gets in or out.

Let the "militia" try to do anything and they'll be quickly disabused of their notion that they're somehow "patriots".

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Nope:

(i)" In the early fall of 2001, Steven Hammond (Son) called the fire department, informing them that he was going to be performing a routine prescribed burn on their ranch. Later that day he started a prescribed fire on their private property. The fire went onto public land and burned 127 acres of grass. The Hammonds put the fire out themselves. There was no communication about the burn from the federal government to the Hammonds at that time. Prescribed fires are a common method that Native Americans and ranchers have used in the area to increase the health & productivity of the land for many centuries.

(j) In 2006 a massive lightning storm started multiple fires that joined together inflaming the countryside. To prevent the fire from destroying their winter range and possibly their home, Steven Hammond (Son) started a backfire on their private property. The backfire was successful in putting out the lightning fires that had covered thousands of acres within a short period of time. The backfire saved much of the range and vegetation needed to feed the cattle through the winter. Steven’s mother, Susan Hammond said: “The backfire worked perfectly, it put out the fire, saved the range and possibly our home”.

(j1) The next day federal agents went to the Harney County Sheriff’s office and filled a police report making accusation against Dwight and Steven Hammond for starting the backfire. A few days after the backfire a Range-Con from the Burns District BLM office asked Steven if he would meet him in town (Frenchglen) for coffee. Steven accepted. When leaving he was arrested by the Harney County Sheriff Dave Glerup and BLM Ranger Orr. Sheriff Glerup then ordered him to go to the ranch and bring back his father. Both Dwight and Steven were booked and on multiple Oregon State charges. The Harney County District Attorney reviewed the accusation, evidence and charges, and determined that the accusations against Dwight & Steven Hammond did not warrant prosecution and dropped all the charges.

(k) In 2011, 5 years after the police report was taken, the U.S. Attorney Office accused Dwight and Steven Hammond of completely different charges, they accused them of being “Terrorist” under the Federal Antiterrorism Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. This act carries a minimum sentence of five years in prison and a maximum sentence of death. Dwight & Steven’s mug shots were all over the news the next week posing them as “Arsonists”. Susan Hammond (Wife & Mother) said: “I would walk down the street or go in a store, people I had known for years would take extreme measures to avoid"

A little confused now. So they were never convicted of arson by a court?

 

[Comshaw]

Nope:

(i)" In the early fall of 2001, Steven Hammond (Son) called the fire department, informing them that he was going to be performing a routine prescribed burn on their ranch. Later that day he started a prescribed fire on their private property. The fire went onto public land and burned 127 acres of grass. The Hammonds put the fire out themselves. There was no communication about the burn from the federal government to the Hammonds at that time. Prescribed fires are a common method that Native Americans and ranchers have used in the area to increase the health & productivity of the land for many centuries.

(j) In 2006 a massive lightning storm started multiple fires that joined together inflaming the countryside. To prevent the fire from destroying their winter range and possibly their home, Steven Hammond (Son) started a backfire on their private property. The backfire was successful in putting out the lightning fires that had covered thousands of acres within a short period of time. The backfire saved much of the range and vegetation needed to feed the cattle through the winter. Steven’s mother, Susan Hammond said: “The backfire worked perfectly, it put out the fire, saved the range and possibly our home”.

(j1) The next day federal agents went to the Harney County Sheriff’s office and filled a police report making accusation against Dwight and Steven Hammond for starting the backfire. A few days after the backfire a Range-Con from the Burns District BLM office asked Steven if he would meet him in town (Frenchglen) for coffee. Steven accepted. When leaving he was arrested by the Harney County Sheriff Dave Glerup and BLM Ranger Orr. Sheriff Glerup then ordered him to go to the ranch and bring back his father. Both Dwight and Steven were booked and on multiple Oregon State charges. The Harney County District Attorney reviewed the accusation, evidence and charges, and determined that the accusations against Dwight & Steven Hammond did not warrant prosecution and dropped all the charges.

(k) In 2011, 5 years after the police report was taken, the U.S. Attorney Office accused Dwight and Steven Hammond of completely different charges, they accused them of being “Terrorist” under the Federal Antiterrorism Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. This act carries a minimum sentence of five years in prison and a maximum sentence of death. Dwight & Steven’s mug shots were all over the news the next week posing them as “Arsonists”. Susan Hammond (Wife & Mother) said: “I would walk down the street or go in a store, people I had known for years would take extreme measures to avoid"

I have a really bad habit of checking things out before believing anything. With that in mind, this came from....where???? With no cite, as far as I can tell this is a manufactured figment. Care to post a link so I can go take a look?

Thanks

Comshaw

 

[Sean]

I have a really bad habit of checking things out before believing anything. With that in mind, this came from....where???? With no cite, as far as I can tell this is a manufactured figment. Care to post a link so I can go take a look?

Thanks

Comshaw

Apparently it's from that well respected legal source the bundyranch blog.

http://bundyranch.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/facts-events-in-hammond-case.html

 

[VaticanAssassin]

A little confused now. So they were never convicted of arson by a court?

Convicted of arson sentenced under 1996 terrorist act

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Convicted of arson sentenced under 1996 terrorist act

So they were convicted in court, where's the problem?

 

[VaticanAssassin]

I have a really bad habit of checking things out before believing anything. With that in mind, this came from....where???? With no cite, as far as I can tell this is a manufactured figment. Care to post a link so I can go take a look?

Thanks

Comshaw

Original source seem to be a local Oregon paper and picked up by others including bloggers....

Best and only time line I found.

 

[Queersetti]

Let me get this straight...There are people who feel, because they think this family got a raw deal in the courts, that it is justifiable for an unrelated group to carry out an armed seizure of federal property and proclaim that it is a "base" for further armed action against the legally elected government of the United States.

BUT

It is not justifiable for African Americans to demonstrate against 400 years of subjugation and oppression.

OK, got it.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

So they were convicted in court, where's the problem?

You mean besides the fact that they where convicted and sentenced and then the federal government stepped 5 years later to increase the sentence under a terrisom act?

The same federal government that has been trying to steal their land for years?

The same federal government that redirected water to swamp out several of their neighbors, destroying their property to buy it cheaply?

Yep. No problem here.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

Let me get this straight...There are people who feel, because they think this family got a raw deal in the courts, that it is justifiable for an unrelated group to carry out an armed seizure of federal property and proclaim that it is a "base" for further armed action against the legally elected government of the United States.

BUT

It is not justifiable for African Americans to demonstrate against 400 years of subjugation and oppression.

OK, got it.

I doubt these people will burn down stores, loot, or assault bystanders...

Your comparison is poor at best...

 

[anchoredinocean]

Let me get this straight...There are people who feel, because they think this family got a raw deal in the courts, that it is justifiable for an unrelated group to carry out an armed seizure of federal property and proclaim that it is a "base" for further armed action against the legally elected government of the United States.

BUT

It is not justifiable for African Americans to demonstrate against 400 years of subjugation and oppression.

OK, got it.

Didn't you hear that racism is over? That it's all just manufactured by Democrats, liberal university elites, and guilty white folks? It's all so they can keep them in the new plantation --- the inner city.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

You mean besides the fact that they where convicted and sentenced and then the federal government stepped 5 years later to increase the sentence under a terrisom act?

The same federal government that has been trying to steal their land for years?

The same federal government that redirected water to swamp out several of their neighbors, destroying their property to buy it cheaply?

Yep. No problem here.

Still a bit confused. They were just convicted once?

If they have evidence the government has been trying to steal their land why not get a lawyer and take it to court?

 

[anchoredinocean]

Hears African American protesters. Salivates and jumps to rioting and violence.

 

[Five_Inch_Heels]

So they were convicted in court, where's the problem?

'Convicted in court' doesn't mean you've done what you were accused of. The increasing number of exonerations proves that.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

I doubt these people will burn down stores, loot, or assault bystanders...

Your comparison is poor at best...

But they have said they will kill. So there's that.....

 

[Sean]

I doubt these people will burn down stores, loot, or assault bystanders...

Your comparison is poor at best...

No, they've already burned 130 acres of federal land to cover up their illegal activities.

 

[ms_ann_thrope]

Time to see what Homeland Security is made of. Unleash the power of the Federal Govt. on it's private citizens.

 

[Queersetti]

I doubt these people will burn down stores, loot, or assault bystanders...

Your comparison is poor at best...

I am not surprised that you think black people looting a store is a more serious offense than white people committing an armed insurrection.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

'Convicted in court' doesn't mean you've done what you were accused of. The increasing number of exonerations proves that.

Fully agree. There is a legal process to have convictions overturned. Did the Hammonds appeal any of their cases?

 

[Sean]

Fully agree. There is a legal process to have convictions overturned. Did the Hammonds appeal any of their cases?

Yep. All the way to the SCOTUS. Which rejected their appeal.

 

[VaticanAssassin]

No, they've already burned 130 acres of federal land to cover up their illegal activities.

Where they charged with poaching?

Convicted?

 

[Sean]

Where they charged with poaching?

Convicted?

They burned the fucking evidence, you dumb cunt. If these guys were black you'd be calling for the fucking eighth armoured division to be in there with tanks.

 

[JohnnySavage]

How is what the Hammond's did or didn't do relevant to an armed and unrelated group traveling 1500 miles taking over a federal facility?

 

[Sean Renaud]

'Convicted in court' doesn't mean you've done what you were accused of. The increasing number of exonerations proves that.

It does however mean that to the "best" of the states ability to judge you did do what you were accused of and the rest of us should generally fall inline. Of course we all know about people who did it and didn't get found guilty and annoying as it may be until such a time that we are ready to dismantle and reorganize the justice system entirely we have to trust they get it right more often than not.