Oregon Patriots Decline Escort Out of Town

[koshergrl]

The roads are being blocked by feds as we write here on the Board.

Sure they are, skippy, lol.

 

[koshergrl]

The locals are tired of BLM and the feds running national lands as they, not the ranchers, want to run the lands.

The proper place to go is to their representatives, not the torch.

The government will not back off this time.

They went to their representatives and crafted out legislation with the BLM..which the BLM ignores.

 

[koshergrl]

"To Bruce Babbitt's credit, he agreed when I told him: I think you would be surprised about what the local ranchers and citizens of Harney County would be willing to do if you give them a chance. To his credit, he said: All right, I will give them that chance. And he did.
"We went to work on legislation. It took a full year. I worked with the Hammonds. I worked with Stacy Davies, I worked with all kinds of folks, put a staffer on it full-time, multiple staffs, and we worked with the environmental community and others. And we created the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Act, model legislation, never been done before, because I said: We don't have to live by past laws, we write laws.
"So we wrote a new law to create a cooperative spirit of management in Harney County. The Hammonds were part of that discussion. We saved a running camp, Harlan Priority Runs. We protected inholder. We tried to do all the right things and create the kind of partnership and cooperation that the Federal Government and the citizens should have."

"Not long after that became law, and it was heralded as this monumental law of great significance and new era in cooperation and spirit of cooperation, some of those involved on the other side and some of the agencies decided to reinterpret it. The first thing they tried to do is shut down this kids' running camp because they said: Well, too many, maybe more than 20, run down this canyon and back up, as they had for many, many years. They wanted to shut it down. So we had to fight them back and said: No, the law says historical standards.
"Then the bureaucrats, because we said: You should have your historical access to your private property, if you are up on Steens Mountain, you should maintain that access like you have always had it. Do you know what the bureaucrats said? They began to solicit from the inholders in this area: How many times did you go up there last year? You see, they wanted to put a noose around the neck of those who were inside. That was a total violation of what we intended, and we had to back them off.
"See, the bureaucracy wants to interpret the laws we write in ways they want, and in this case they were wrong, not once, but twice.
"Then, a couple of years ago, I learned that, despite the fact we created the first cow-free wilderness in the United States under this law, and said clearly in this law that it would be the responsibility of the government to put up fencing to keep the cows out, as part of the agreement, the Bureau of Land Management said: No, we are not going to follow that law. And they told the ranchers they had to build the fence.

"I networked with my Democrat colleague from Oregon, Mr. DeFazio, who was part of writing this law. I said: Peter, you remember that, right? He said: Yeah, I didn't like it, but that was the case. BLM still wouldn't listen. So we continued to push it and they argued back.
Well, it turns out there had been a second rancher who brought this to my attention who they were telling had to do the same thing, build a fence, when the government was supposed to under the law I wrote. The arrogance of the agency was such that they said: We don't agree with you.
Now, there aren't many times, Mr. Speaker, in this job when you can say I know what the intent of the law was, but in this case I could because I wrote the law, I knew the intent.
Oh, that wasn't good enough. No, no, no. No, no, no. The arrogance of these agency people was such that we had to go to the archives and drag out the boxes from 2000, 1999-2000, when we wrote this law, from the hearings that had all the records for the hearings and the floor discussions to talk about the intent. And our retired Member, George Miller, actually we used some of his information where he said the government would provide the fencing. They were still reluctant to follow it. So I put language in the appropriations bill that restated the Federal law.
Do you understand how frustrated I am at this? Can you imagine how the people on the ground feel? Can you imagine? If you are not there, you can't. If you are not there, you can't."

Oregon militants: Walden takes BLM to woodshed - transcript

 

[Luddly Neddite]

The LDS church has told the Bundys they are wrong.

Good people have told the Bundys they are wrong.

So far no one has been shot.

If they shoot anyone, the drones will be used against them. Send the women and children out if it is martyrdom the men want.

I read the old fart in the rocking chair is a morm but are the others as well?

 

[JakeStarkey]

They are nearly all Mormons.

 

[emilynghiem]

"To Bruce Babbitt's credit, he agreed when I told him: I think you would be surprised about what the local ranchers and citizens of Harney County would be willing to do if you give them a chance. To his credit, he said: All right, I will give them that chance. And he did.
"We went to work on legislation. It took a full year. I worked with the Hammonds. I worked with Stacy Davies, I worked with all kinds of folks, put a staffer on it full-time, multiple staffs, and we worked with the environmental community and others. And we created the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Act, model legislation, never been done before, because I said: We don't have to live by past laws, we write laws.
"So we wrote a new law to create a cooperative spirit of management in Harney County. The Hammonds were part of that discussion. We saved a running camp, Harlan Priority Runs. We protected inholder. We tried to do all the right things and create the kind of partnership and cooperation that the Federal Government and the citizens should have."

"Not long after that became law, and it was heralded as this monumental law of great significance and new era in cooperation and spirit of cooperation, some of those involved on the other side and some of the agencies decided to reinterpret it. The first thing they tried to do is shut down this kids' running camp because they said: Well, too many, maybe more than 20, run down this canyon and back up, as they had for many, many years. They wanted to shut it down. So we had to fight them back and said: No, the law says historical standards.
"Then the bureaucrats, because we said: You should have your historical access to your private property, if you are up on Steens Mountain, you should maintain that access like you have always had it. Do you know what the bureaucrats said? They began to solicit from the inholders in this area: How many times did you go up there last year? You see, they wanted to put a noose around the neck of those who were inside. That was a total violation of what we intended, and we had to back them off.
"See, the bureaucracy wants to interpret the laws we write in ways they want, and in this case they were wrong, not once, but twice.
"Then, a couple of years ago, I learned that, despite the fact we created the first cow-free wilderness in the United States under this law, and said clearly in this law that it would be the responsibility of the government to put up fencing to keep the cows out, as part of the agreement, the Bureau of Land Management said: No, we are not going to follow that law. And they told the ranchers they had to build the fence.

"I networked with my Democrat colleague from Oregon, Mr. DeFazio, who was part of writing this law. I said: Peter, you remember that, right? He said: Yeah, I didn't like it, but that was the case. BLM still wouldn't listen. So we continued to push it and they argued back.
Well, it turns out there had been a second rancher who brought this to my attention who they were telling had to do the same thing, build a fence, when the government was supposed to under the law I wrote. The arrogance of the agency was such that they said: We don't agree with you.
Now, there aren't many times, Mr. Speaker, in this job when you can say I know what the intent of the law was, but in this case I could because I wrote the law, I knew the intent.
Oh, that wasn't good enough. No, no, no. No, no, no. The arrogance of these agency people was such that we had to go to the archives and drag out the boxes from 2000, 1999-2000, when we wrote this law, from the hearings that had all the records for the hearings and the floor discussions to talk about the intent. And our retired Member, George Miller, actually we used some of his information where he said the government would provide the fencing. They were still reluctant to follow it. So I put language in the appropriations bill that restated the Federal law.
Do you understand how frustrated I am at this? Can you imagine how the people on the ground feel? Can you imagine? If you are not there, you can't. If you are not there, you can't."

Oregon militants: Walden takes BLM to woodshed - transcript

Wow. Sounds like the bureaucracy and political oppression I saw go down in Freedmen's Town.
Federal laws reforming public housing were monumental, credited largely to Congressman Mickey Leeland and
local resident community leader Lenwood Johnson whose team co-authored the innovative Community Campus Concepts.
http://www.houstonprogressive.org
Congresswoman Sheila Jackson Lee and HUD Secretary Cisneros even signed in agreement on these plans
that set up democratically elected and managed tenant councils to participate in restoring two National Historic registered landmarks,
both the housing complex itself, a military WWII site, and the 40 block registered district of Freedmen's Town.

But like the above scenario, the bureaucrats with HACH/Housing Authority and bought-out City officials, whose campaigns and offices depend on bowing to developer interests,
abused public, federal, city and legal resources and authority to evict, censor and bulldoze and destroy these plans of the residents,
that were written into the subgrant agreements as requirements for the federal funding. Nobody enforced that, because HACH is a pseudo-nonprofit, appointed by the city, but gets federal funds, and there is no check on this bureaucracy once they are in cahoots with the City that chooses developer interests over the national history and community. Whenever violations or conflicts were found, the problems were never corrected. Any officials blamed and removed simply got replaced with others carefully selected to continue the same pattern of corruption and abuse. Abused funds never went back to the community plans and programs that were denied this help; like catching crooks stealing money intended to renovate a landmark site into a school, giving it to developers friends to demolish the community and site so the history is erased and can't be rescued later, but the govt seizes the money and doesn't return it to the people it was supposed to go to who are now facing triple the damages but aren't getting anything. All their proof of wrongdoing is demolished, which is part of the plan, to rush and destroy first before any legal help can step in and stop it. Once the history is gone, it will be too late, like killing off the entire roomful of witnesses so nobody can ever testify to prove the wrongs committed.

The City cleverly redirected federal funds elsewhere and swapped out sources so they could say they weren't required to follow federal laws. Nobody can police that either, because the legal research it would take to PROVE IN COURT the laundering that went on is astronomical, and black minority and elderly church volunteers cannot afford that high level corporate legal battle.

The City abused this inequality in status to bypass any local or federal laws and protections that would have equally defended the residents interest in developing a sustainable campus that preserved the history, the community and relations with govt. Totally gutted the community and destroyed 3 national historic landmarks, including the Astrodome by wasting taxpayers money on abuse and mismanagement, waste, destruction of history, you name it. All because the residents were NONVIOLENT, did not have legal resources to stop these violations, because all the lawyers and corporate interests will back the City in a clear conflict of interest politically.

No money was given to nonprofits to build the school and preserve the history,
but tax money was given to wealthy corporate developers to buy property and destroy history.
The city wasted 51 million on just one site they could own and control, and 4 millions saving 4 walls after a church burned down and they took over the property. So they only help if they can seize the property, and deny help to any other community nonprofit, even evicting them, to shut them out of the process and hope they die out. Like genocide of native tribes -- abusing govt resources to seize destroy and control property while kicking out natives so they lose all rights.

It has been an ongoing conspiracy to violate equal rights and protections, all abusing millions of taxpayer money to do so.
While denying any such equal help support or grants to the citizens and groups protecting the community and national history.
Tax money went to abusive corrupt dealings for developer and political profit. Obscene.

All because the bigger bullies have more political and legal/financial resources to pay themselves for what they want from govt at taxpayer expense.
Even 3.4 million of taxpayer money was given away for free to wealthy corporate developer friends of the Mayor to grab land and destroy history.

So where is the equal protection under law promised in the Constitution?
Only if you have guns and get the story into the media.
Or you have equal power and money to sue and WIN against corporate interests (like the pastor and church lobby that had to organize a very expensive
drawn out legal and media campaign that finally won their lawsuit against the City for abusing and violating the city's own given process to push a law by bypassing State law, Constitutional law, and the city's own policies "until they were sued in court and ordered by the judge to follow the city law."

Who can afford equal protection when bureaucrats don't need to follow city, state or federal laws unless they are sued and lose in court.

I totally understand why these BLM standoffs happen.
If bureaucrats don't follow the laws their agencies are supposed to be governed under,
then the citizens wronged have to act like the police and confront them with authority of law to compel them to COMPLY.

When citizens don't comply with laws and are asked to stop the violations or get arrested, we can get shot by armed police.
When govt doesn't comply with laws, they claim immunity! Then you have to sue to beat the immunity and try to argue your case and outlast the
endless resources of govt lawyers paid for with our tax money -- so what do they care if they are right or wrong or how long this drags on if the public pays for the cost of fighting. Our tax money automatically pays for govt even if we are suing them, but citizens have to raise our own funds to defend our side of the case.
We do not get "equal legal resources" as the opposing side we already pay for, so to even fight we have to pay additional costs even if the govt is in the wrong.

WTF

 

[Carla_Danger]

If they have an argument then make it in the appropriate places. Setting fires at your whim that are against the law isn't going to fly. People in Furgeson or any other city that commit vandalism are caught when possible and prosecuted.

I'm not overly concerned about this group occupying a building for a few days to make a point. Read Civil Disobedience by Thoreau, I support this. At gun point? Yes that is a problem.
They've gotten a lot of attention to whatever it is they are angry about and now its time to follow the law and fight it out in court and the public square.

Occupy Wallstreet, Black Lives Matter, Greenpeace, et al. Civil disobedience is healthy if done in a healthy way.

Sticking a gun in someone's face or threatening the same isn't going to cut it.

Oregon standoff: Idaho group arrives to 'secure perimeter, prevent Waco-style situation'

Good grief, more toothless hillbillies who are leeching off the Government.

 

[Kosh]

If they have an argument then make it in the appropriate places. Setting fires at your whim that are against the law isn't going to fly. People in Furgeson or any other city that commit vandalism are caught when possible and prosecuted.

I'm not overly concerned about this group occupying a building for a few days to make a point. Read Civil Disobedience by Thoreau, I support this. At gun point? Yes that is a problem.
They've gotten a lot of attention to whatever it is they are angry about and now its time to follow the law and fight it out in court and the public square.

Occupy Wallstreet, Black Lives Matter, Greenpeace, et al. Civil disobedience is healthy if done in a healthy way.

Sticking a gun in someone's face or threatening the same isn't going to cut it.

Oregon standoff: Idaho group arrives to 'secure perimeter, prevent Waco-style situation'

Good grief, more toothless hillbillies who are leeching off the Government.

Says the far left drone leeching off the government!

 

[Luddly Neddite]

 

[emilynghiem]

 

[Toro]

Weren't conservatives big proponents of mandatory sentencing?

And if we didn't have mandatory sentencing, they wouldn't have to go to jail for as long as they did because they received light punishment by the original judge?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

They are nearly all Mormons.

There goes the myth that morms don't drink alcohol.

And lie, steal and cheat.

 

[JakeStarkey]

And so do anti-Godists. What's your point?

 

[Moonglow]

The OP's story forgot to tell you the outcome of the town meeting, they voted unanimously to have the so called patriots leave and go home....The militia is refusing to do what it said it would....

 

[JakeStarkey]

The residents want the remaining militia to go to their own families.

They are not needed.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

when they asked for snacks the townsfolk said "molon labe" .......

 

[Luddly Neddite]

And so do anti-Godists. What's your point?

JakeStarkey

The people you refer to as "anti-godists" are not known for preaching how others should behave and then doing the opposite. Even if they do, that's a pretty lame excuse for the "godists" who do it.

These yee-hadists' religion preaches abstaining from booze and yet they took cases of Coors lite (of all things!) and then stole donations to go into town to get drunked up.

Surely not even you can deny that is hypocritical and not very "godly". Even you cannot defend their lying, stealing and cheating.

Or can you?

 

[JakeStarkey]

anti-Godists condemn religion in the public forum.

Not acceptable and will always be stomped.

I agree these yee-hadists are lousy anti-Americans.

 

[mamooth]

The Hammonds had a chance for clemency before, but thanks to the seditious kooks, there's zero chance of it now. Such clemency would now be regarded as giving in to terrorist threats, and no governor of any party would ever go that way. If they did, everyone who wanted someone sprung from jail would run over and occupy some federal property.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Hammonds did the crimes, now they will do the times.