yup allegedly that was the reason... though I'm not sure how that works really
how does burning 100+ acres do that over simply picking up empty cases?
anyway it was the burning itself that broke the law
Oregon "Armed protest" at US wildlife building
- Thread starter Dugganator
- Start date
yup allegedly that was the reason... though I'm not sure how that works really
how does burning 100+ acres do that over simply picking up empty cases?
anyway it was the burning itself that broke the law
Sounds like there's been a copycat incident in the UK! 
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 13,052
- Location
- london
The true story as to what happen here in brief:
The farmers had homesteaded the land for 200 years in their family and looked after it and used it. Then the gov did a geological survey and discovered minerals under it. They used that organisation they are now occupying to try and claim the land without compensation from the farmers. They refused to abandon the land and militia from all over the country came to help them, this was months ago. Then this organisation started fires all over the property in an attempt to ruin the land. Then when the farmers started fires to prevent the fire from spreading to important parts of the land, the government arrested on the basis that they were starting the fires on government land. Even though there is video evidence of the fires burning all around the farmers and them freaking out trying to protect their land. This is why they have gone and claimed the building when it was empty in an attempt to stop the organisation from acting any further.
The farmers had homesteaded the land for 200 years in their family and looked after it and used it. Then the gov did a geological survey and discovered minerals under it. They used that organisation they are now occupying to try and claim the land without compensation from the farmers. They refused to abandon the land and militia from all over the country came to help them, this was months ago. Then this organisation started fires all over the property in an attempt to ruin the land. Then when the farmers started fires to prevent the fire from spreading to important parts of the land, the government arrested on the basis that they were starting the fires on government land. Even though there is video evidence of the fires burning all around the farmers and them freaking out trying to protect their land. This is why they have gone and claimed the building when it was empty in an attempt to stop the organisation from acting any further.
Think most people would agree this is now a miscarriage of justice that's come about because of abuse of power and vested interests (there is also talk of uranium deposits in that land and that the "nature reserve" is being used as a means to an end before being transferred to mining interests). And some people, well-informed about the abuses of the Feds and the hypocrisy of no individuals who work for Fed agencies being punished when they cause far greater damage, want to draw attention to it as freemen, exercising their constitutional rights, without "pleading like subjects" in a protest and then going home.
Most governments abuse their people, freedom goes as far as they want it to, having a gun is one thing, trying to use it to defend yourself rightly or wrongly will get you killed i.e. waco.
As far as being a freeman, its not really possible as governments will not let you opt out of the social contract enforced on us all.
.waco they were making illegal fully automatic weapons though.
True, my point is that most gov's dont care and make you comply, with force if needed.
Surely turning up with guns in itself is "threat to use force" - why bring a gun at all if you're not prepared to use it, or at least not prepared to make it look like you're going to use it?
You don't turn up at a "peaceful" protest with weapons
Got to agree with the other posts saying that if these guys had brown skin I bet there would be a whole different reaction...
Problem is if they weren't carrying guns the police would have gone in already and removed them after about 12 hours.
That said the reason behind this seems to be stupid. This has been going on, on and off, for a few years now as far as I can tell. It's basically a load of cattle ranchers who want their cattle to be allowed to wander all over public land, including wildlife reserves, with impunity. To help they seem to spend a lot of time burning that land, which has no benefit for anything but their cattle.
nah - they were leasing the federal land in question...
the issue is they were found guilty of arson, got a more lenient sentence than the law states the minimum sentence should be and the prosecutor appealed... now they're due to report back to serve further time in jail
as a result a bunch of militia nuts are 'taking a stand' over all of this...
The Guardian states that he and his son were sent to jail. After release a higher judge ruled that their prison term wasn't long enough, according to law, and told them to go back to jail for the extra years they should have served to begin with.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...ns-showdown-with-us-agents-at-wildlife-refuge
Basically they set a load of fires on their land, which, in several years carried across to the wildlife reserve.
As mentioned in the previous post there is a lot of angst between ranchers and public land in certain parts of the country, to me this sounds like a continuation of the struggle. I'm willing to bet the judge decided that the fires didn't cross into the wildlife reserve accidentally...
Was only on the first page when I posted that, I did'n't realise it had all been clarified on the second.
Yes, because that's exactly the same as a couple or bunch of people killing everyone they can in a building or outside. The only possible difference between the two scenarios is racism, obviously.
It's a bird sanctuary building. No people in it. No secrets in it. Nothing of any importance in it. Nothing unusual or illegal with people in that part of the world having guns, so what's actually happening is that some people have occupied an unimportant building with no hostages. That's not international news. It's not even national news. It's hardly local news. Giving them no attention is by far the best course of action, since it safely ends the situation with no harm done.
People don't even know that all of the people in there are "white", let alone that there's any reason why it would be relevant if it is true. It's just an obvious thing for people who want to display their own racism and/or support for terrorism to say because it's a politically useful statement for those purposes.
How many attacks have they made on civilians for the purpose of causing fear and promoting their own agenda?
It's none, isn't it?
Is there any evidence that they have any intention of doing so?
There isn't, is there?
Do you really think that doesn't matter? Your argument is based on the idea that slaughtering random civilians solely for the sake of doing so doesn't matter at all. Is that really your position?
The problem is you probably think terrorism is "person with a firearm", that's simply not the case. Terrorism involves political or religious motivation, this is why some random nut cases who shoot up schools and happen to be white aren't labelled as terrorists.
The Second Amendment does not state that a "well regulated militia" is a requirement to be armed though.
but some religious nuts armed with weapons who break into some remote building belonging to the government probably do fit the description
the feds will probably just cordon the place off and wait until they get cold and tired and surrender
an amusing result would be if all of them are charged with felonies meaning they can no longer legally own those firearms they love so much
So breaking and entering, not terrorism. Just because they may be religious, doesn't mean it's religiously motivated.
People burning down abortion clinics is usually religiously motivated, thus terrorism, they are usually white too, but that's the point, the race and weapons involved are irrelevant, it's all about the motive.
It is religiously motivated ergo they're quite clearly a domestic terror group.