US government building in Oregon seized by armed group

[webfact]

US government building in Oregon seized by armed group
By Keith Walker



BURNS: -- A US government building has been seized by an armed group.

The National Wildlife refuge in the US state of Oregon was taken over during the Christmas holiday by a group that is angry about two farmers, convicted of arson four years ago, being ordered back to prison..

Dwight Hammond and his son Steven had set fires on public land to protect their property from wildfires.

“Seventy-three percent of the land in Harney county is owned by the federal government,” said Ammon Bundy, one of the gunmen. “We just cannot have that. The people cannot survive without their land and resources.”

Local media reported the group were not looking to hurt anybody, but they would not rule out violence if police tried to remove them.

On Saturday (January 2) group member and anti-Islam activist Jon Ritzheimer said in a video posted on line that people “need to take a stand,” refering to Dwight and Steven Hammond. “Dwight, do you want to die in prison labeled as a terrorist by these oppressors?

Another group member is a US Army veteran who reportedly helped organise militia snipers to target federal agents in a standoff in Nevada last year.

The group is demanding the release of the Hammonds.


-- (c) Copyright Euronews 2016-01-04

[webfact]

Oregon standoff latest in dispute over Western lands

BURNS, Ore. (AP) — The remote high desert of eastern Oregon became the latest flashpoint for anti-government sentiment as armed protesters occupied a national wildlife refuge to object to a prison sentence for local ranchers for burning federal land.

Ammon Bundy — the son of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, who was involved in a 2014 standoff with the government over grazing rights — is among the people at the headquarters of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. It was unclear exactly how many people were taking part in the protests.

Ammon Bundy posted a video on his Facebook page asking for militia members to come help him. He said "this is not a time to stand down. It's a time to stand up and come to Harney County," where Burns is located.

Bundy and other militia members came to Burns last month, a small town about 280 miles southeast of Portland, Oregon. They were upset over the looming prison sentences for local ranchers Dwight and Steven Hammond. They went to the wildlife refuge Saturday evening following a peaceful rally in Burns to support the ranchers.


Dwight Hammond, 73, and Steven Hammond, 46, said they lit the fires on federal land in 2001 and 2006 to reduce the growth of invasive plants and protect their property from wildfires.

The two were convicted of the arsons three years ago and served time — the father three months, the son one year. But a federal judge ruled in October that their terms were too short under U.S. minimum sentencing law and ordered them back to prison for about four years each.

The decision generated controversy and is part of a decades-long dispute between some Westerners and the federal government over the use of public lands. The issue traces back to the 1970s and the "Sagebrush Rebellion," a move by Western states like Nevada to increase local control over federal land. Critics of the push for more local control have said the federal government should administer the public lands for the widest possible uses, including environmental and recreation.

In an interview with reporters late Saturday night posted on Facebook, Bundy said he and others are occupying a building at the refuge because "the people have been abused long enough."

"I feel we are in a situation where if we do not do something, if we do not take a hard stand, we'll be in a position where we'll be no longer able to do so," he said.

Bundy said the group planned to stay at the refuge indefinitely. On Sunday, supplies were seen being delivered to the refuge area, which is remote even by rural Oregon standards.

Dwight Hammond has said he and his son plan to peacefully report to prison Monday as ordered by the judge.

Harney County Sheriff Dave Ward said the group of armed protesters came to town under false pretenses.

"These men came to Harney County claiming to be part of militia groups supporting local ranchers, when in reality these men had alternative motives to attempt to over throw the county and federal government in hopes to spark a movement across the United States," Ward said in a statement on Sunday afternoon.

The sheriff says he is working with local and federal authorities to keep the citizens in his county safe and to resolve the situation as quickly and peacefully as possible.

He is asking people to stay away from the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge for their own safety. He said he does not think any other parts of the county are in immediate danger.

Beth Anne Steele, an FBI spokeswoman in Portland, said Saturday that the agency was aware of the situation at the national wildlife refuge. She made no further comment.

U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden, who had been briefed by the FBI agent in charge in Portland, Oregon, said most local residents do not support the protesters.

"The overwhelming majority of people there very much want to get on with their lives without this disruption and are not in sympathy with a bunch of outsiders," Wyden said.

Local residents have expressed fear of potential of violence. A peaceful rally Saturday in support of the Hammonds featured speeches, flags and marching.

As marchers reached the courthouse, they tossed hundreds of pennies at the locked door. Their message: Civilians were buying back their government. After the march passed, two girls swooped in to scavenge the pennies.

A few blocks away, Hammond and his wife, Susan, greeted marchers, who planted flower bouquets in the snow. They sang some songs, Hammond said a few words, and the protesters marched back to their cars.


-- (c) Associated Press 2016-01-04

[Seastallion]

""These men came to Harney County claiming to be part of militia groups supporting local ranchers, when in reality these men had alternative motives to attempt to over throw the county and federal government in hopes to spark a movement across the United States," Ward said in a statement on Sunday afternoon."

Although I think these protesters are stupid and have not thought this through, the above statement from the sheriff is a worry: He is already vilifying the wingnuts to a level of treason, thereby justifying their deaths.

And it will not surprise me if it all escalates to some sort of Waco situation.

Who's looking after the animals?

[simple1]

""These men came to Harney County claiming to be part of militia groups supporting local ranchers, when in reality these men had alternative motives to attempt to over throw the county and federal government in hopes to spark a movement across the United States," Ward said in a statement on Sunday afternoon."

Although I think these protesters are stupid and have not thought this through, the above statement from the sheriff is a worry: He is already vilifying the wingnuts to a level of treason, thereby justifying their deaths.

And it will not surprise me if it all escalates to some sort of Waco situation.

Who's looking after the animals?

From the OP:

"Another group member is a US Army veteran who reportedly helped organise militia snipers to target federal agents in a standoff in Nevada last year"

These are the types that some members idolise

[ezzra]

Ruby Ridge 2? US law enforcements are very jittery and jumpy as it is, with all the random shootings and

killings now days, these guys don't stand a chance.....

[mopar71]

I'm not condoning the taking over any building, gov't or privately owned.

But this...

"Dwight Hammond, 73, and Steven Hammond, 46, said they lit the fires on federal land in 2001 and 2006 to reduce the growth of invasive plants and protect their property from wildfires.

The two were convicted of the arsons three years ago and served time — the father three months, the son one year. But a federal judge ruled in October that their terms were too short under U.S. minimum sentencing law and ordered them back to prison for about four years each."

Is that something that happens often? Someone is convicted of a crime, serves time, is released early, then a couple years later a judge says, 'oh, you didn't serve enough of your sentence, get back to jail'? I can see where that would piss someone off.

[Credo]

I would assume that when the judge failed to impose the minimum sentence required by law, then they would have to go back to jail.

Sounds like he tried to cut them a break in the first place, but it didn't work.

That's the problem with minimum sentences; they don't take into account mitigating circumstances. Judges have no discretion.

[Seastallion]

I'm not condoning the taking over any building, gov't or privately owned.

But this...

"Dwight Hammond, 73, and Steven Hammond, 46, said they lit the fires on federal land in 2001 and 2006 to reduce the growth of invasive plants and protect their property from wildfires.

The two were convicted of the arsons three years ago and served time — the father three months, the son one year. But a federal judge ruled in October that their terms were too short under U.S. minimum sentencing law and ordered them back to prison for about four years each."

Is that something that happens often? Someone is convicted of a crime, serves time, is released early, then a couple years later a judge says, 'oh, you didn't serve enough of your sentence, get back to jail'? I can see where that would piss someone off.

It sounds like the first judge was sympathetic and was far too lenient according to law.

Pissed off? Sure, but then, do the crime, do the time. You can't go around burning public land.

[NeverSure]

From the OP:

"Another group member is a US Army veteran who reportedly helped organise militia snipers to target federal agents in a standoff in Nevada last year"

These are the types that some members idolise

Which ones? Not me. I think they are idiots. Some people set fire to government land which endangered animals and people for however far it might have burned. This is huge and open ranching country with a low population, but not many good ways to control a fire. Take a look. Please. If someone had been killed it would have been murder.

These activist are loons who are looking for attention by defending criminals.

The time to start a backfire that will burn toward the main fire and deprive it of fuel so it can't advance in your direction is during a fire. Then it is understandable. However starting one for selfish purposes could set a fire that burned a huge area and it might not get put out until the Fall rains came.

This is desert. It's very dry with low rainfall. Where it can be farmed it is wheat, cattle, and alfalfa (cattle feed) country. I grew up in that kind of country and it's beautiful and quiet and peaceful and "back to nature". I never heard of anyone stupid enough to start a fire. We feared fire from perhaps a lightening strike.

I have no opinion about the sentencing error because I don't recall hearing anything like that happening before. I do have a strong opinion about criminal arsonists and any extremists who would support them.

Cheers.

PS The Federal Government owns most of the land but they lease it to the ranchers dirt cheap so they can graze cattle on it. The US is huge and awesome.

[mamypoko]

zip ties and due process for each of them

[simple1]

From the OP:

"Another group member is a US Army veteran who reportedly helped organise militia snipers to target federal agents in a standoff in Nevada last year"

These are the types that some members idolise

Which ones? Not me. I think they are idiots. Some people set fire to government land which endangered animals and people for however far it might have burned. This is huge and open ranching country with a low population, but not many good ways to control a fire. Take a look. Please. If someone had been killed it would have been murder.

These activist are loons who are looking for attention by defending criminals.

The time to start a backfire that will burn toward the main fire and deprive it of fuel so it can't advance in your direction is during a fire. Then it is understandable. However starting one for selfish purposes could set a fire that burned a huge area and it might not get put out until the Fall rains came.

This is desert. It's very dry with low rainfall. Where it can be farmed it is wheat, cattle, and alfalfa (cattle feed) country. I grew up in that kind of country and it's beautiful and quiet and peaceful and "back to nature". I never heard of anyone stupid enough to start a fire. We feared fire from perhaps a lightening strike.

I have no opinion about the sentencing error because I don't recall hearing anything like that happening before. I do have a strong opinion about criminal arsonists and any extremists who would support them.

Cheers.

PS The Federal Government owns most of the land but they lease it to the ranchers dirt cheap so they can graze cattle on it. The US is huge and awesome.

Will no doubt come as surprise your post got my first 'like' for you.

Come to Oz, I'm sure you will reach the same conclusion "huge and awesome". As an advisory jingoism isn't welcomed.

Edited January 4, 2016 by simple1

[maoro2013]

Our house in Australia backed on to national park. It was illegal to clear any of the park area, but we did, cleared and burnt off every year, along with others in the same area. Had we not we definitely would have lost our house in bush fires in the late 60's. Had the authorities caught up with us I am sure there would be no jail time. It sounds like exactly the same situation that these poor dudes are in.

[bendejo]

There is a big difference between non-violent protest and armed occupation.

The T word is being used by several news channels. Aside from it being federal property, there is the issue of crossing state lines to commit criminal acts, transportation of arms, etc. but if it can be categorized as terrorism, well, from here on these boys will leading a whole new life.

Yeah, these guys appear to emboldened by the way there was no response to the Bundy ranch thing, these things get messy politically and I would try the "ignore it and they'll get tired" tactic too. I think these boys have glory in their eyes, they'll die folk heroes. Is this suicide terrorism American style?

[NeverSure]

Naw, they aren't terrorists. Terrorists are for real and tend to strike without warning. These are mouthy wannabe's looking for personal attention, not virgins. They are probably cowards. I assure you that no one in Harney County is afraid of them, long term. Terrorists also want you to think that "there's more where that came from" so you be looking over your shoulder. These guys don't have a second wave of idiots.

I don't know what the outcome will be but I assure you they are a teeny, teeny fringe nutso group that isn't going to achieve anything they want.

[maderaroja]

Do the crime and then do the time. All of it!

[Orac]

Naw, they aren't terrorists. Terrorists are for real and tend to strike without warning. These are mouthy wannabe's looking for personal attention, not virgins. They are probably cowards. I assure you that no one in Harney County is afraid of them, long term. Terrorists also want you to think that "there's more where that came from" so you be looking over your shoulder. These guys don't have a second wave of idiots.

I don't know what the outcome will be but I assure you they are a teeny, teeny fringe nutso group that isn't going to achieve anything they want.

They have attracted some more hardcore nutters in the past though...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Las_Vegas_shootings

[Habs]

Be a differnt story if they were Black or Native Americans, would of already started shooting...

[mopar71]

Be a differnt story if they were Black or Native Americans, would of already started shooting...

Never would have ordered them back to jail in the first place.

[SOTIRIOS]

....not good on so many levels.....

...wonder how this will unfold......

[MaeJoMTB]

Can't see extending the jail time for a 73 year old as being very productive in any way.

Judge and justice system in the wrong ...... just from that fact.

Don't need to know anything else.

[connda]

I can understand the Bundy ranch stand-off, but these guy went to Burn's looking for trouble. Agent provocateurs? It gives one pause to wonder. I can't condone what they are doing.

[connda]

I'm not condoning the taking over any building, gov't or privately owned.

But this...

"Dwight Hammond, 73, and Steven Hammond, 46, said they lit the fires on federal land in 2001 and 2006 to reduce the growth of invasive plants and protect their property from wildfires.

The two were convicted of the arsons three years ago and served time — the father three months, the son one year. But a federal judge ruled in October that their terms were too short under U.S. minimum sentencing law and ordered them back to prison for about four years each."

Is that something that happens often? Someone is convicted of a crime, serves time, is released early, then a couple years later a judge says, 'oh, you didn't serve enough of your sentence, get back to jail'? I can see where that would piss someone off.

Isn't that double jeopardy? Seems as though the judge is trying to set a precedence.

Edited January 4, 2016 by connda

[Credo]

No. Not double jeopardy. They were not re-tried for the same crime. This has only to do with them not having served the minimum sentence prescribed by law.

It sounds like a judge was nice and gave them a lesser sentence than they should have had.

[Seastallion]

There is a big difference between non-violent protest and armed occupation.

The T word is being used by several news channels. Aside from it being federal property, there is the issue of crossing state lines to commit criminal acts, transportation of arms, etc. but if it can be categorized as terrorism, well, from here on these boys will leading a whole new life.

Yeah, these guys appear to emboldened by the way there was no response to the Bundy ranch thing, these things get messy politically and I would try the "ignore it and they'll get tired" tactic too. I think these boys have glory in their eyes, they'll die folk heroes. Is this suicide terrorism American style?

It's hard to do it legally as the sheriff has to act, but ignoring them would indeed be the way to go. Block the road off well back from where TV cameras can see them, forbid over-flights, and sit it out. Arrest them when they're bored and hungry. If they get no publicity, the wind will be taken from their sails.

[Johpa]

Given that this is one of the more remote regions in the U.S., best to just ignore them. I have done some motorcycle riding through Harney County and trust me, desolate does not begin to describe it.

[mopar71]

No. Not double jeopardy. They were not re-tried for the same crime. This has only to do with them not having served the minimum sentence prescribed by law.

It sounds like a judge was nice and gave them a lesser sentence than they should have had.

I wonder how much time had passed? They were convicted three years ago, the father served a few months and the son served one year. So it sounds at least like the last of them got out of jail two years ago. So it took two years before someone noticed they didn't server the mandated minimum? I'm sure the lawyers knew. I think anyone would be upset if told, "hey, two years ago we released you from prison but now you need to go back for another 4 years because we goofed up when we let you out too early." There must be more to the story.

[Credo]

You could be right. There maybe more than we know. Maybe a release for good behavior? Maybe jurisdiction problems with who sentenced them and then who allowed the release? Not sure.

[stevenl]

No. Not double jeopardy. They were not re-tried for the same crime. This has only to do with them not having served the minimum sentence prescribed by law.

It sounds like a judge was nice and gave them a lesser sentence than they should have had.

I wonder how much time had passed? They were convicted three years ago, the father served a few months and the son served one year. So it sounds at least like the last of them got out of jail two years ago. So it took two years before someone noticed they didn't server the mandated minimum? I'm sure the lawyers knew. I think anyone would be upset if told, "hey, two years ago we released you from prison but now you need to go back for another 4 years because we goofed up when we let you out too early." There must be more to the story.

I presumed there have been appeals against the additional punishment, but they have run out now, hence the time passed.

But that is just an assumption

[willyumiii]

These people are domestic terrorists.

They should be taken out by the military immediately.

Reports I read say the police have not even responded yet!

If a group of heavily armed Muslim American citizens or even Mexican American citizens forcibly took over a government facility like this, we would be hearing about the body count in the news by now!

[willyumiii]

From the OP:

"Another group member is a US Army veteran who reportedly helped organise militia snipers to target federal agents in a standoff in Nevada last year"

These are the types that some members idolise

Which ones? Not me. I think they are idiots. Some people set fire to government land which endangered animals and people for however far it might have burned. This is huge and open ranching country with a low population, but not many good ways to control a fire. Take a look. Please. If someone had been killed it would have been murder.

These activist are loons who are looking for attention by defending criminals.

The time to start a backfire that will burn toward the main fire and deprive it of fuel so it can't advance in your direction is during a fire. Then it is understandable. However starting one for selfish purposes could set a fire that burned a huge area and it might not get put out until the Fall rains came.

This is desert. It's very dry with low rainfall. Where it can be farmed it is wheat, cattle, and alfalfa (cattle feed) country. I grew up in that kind of country and it's beautiful and quiet and peaceful and "back to nature". I never heard of anyone stupid enough to start a fire. We feared fire from perhaps a lightening strike.

I have no opinion about the sentencing error because I don't recall hearing anything like that happening before. I do have a strong opinion about criminal arsonists and any extremists who would support them.

Cheers.

PS The Federal Government owns most of the land but they lease it to the ranchers dirt cheap so they can graze cattle on it. The US is huge and awesome.

Good post Neversure.

I am an ex wildland firefighter and what you say is 100% correct.

You and I don't always agree, but I do respect your posts.