I’ve been through Burns, Oregon a few times — don’t remember a thing about it. It’s a nice long empty drive through fairly arid country: lots of rock and sagebrush, and an occasional shallow marshy stream adding a little green to the landscape. There are towns, mostly consisting of a gas station, a tiny post office, and maybe a little cafe, but you just drive on through, because it’s two hours to the next town, and you really want to get this trip over.
So having a mob of ‘militia’ take over a town there isn’t just a criminal act, it’s a cowardly act. They picked a quiet little place which is probably mostly conservative, but conservative in an old-fashioned way that says you leave your neighbor along, and they found themselves a target that is far away from anyone else who might tell them “no”.
I know the kind of people who committed this criminal invasion, too. They also come from small isolated places, the kind where there aren’t many people to talk to, except a few family and friends. They work all day at something mindless and get out of the habit of thinking; they get together with their buddies, or their father, or their grandfather, and they start bouncing their resentments and theories and lonely thoughts off of one another, and there’s no check against reality — it all just reverberates back and forth and gets fed now and then by talk radio and pretty soon they’ve got a goddamned mythos that ennobles them as heroes of the land and the government as their enemy. It’s the only enemy they’ve got. It’s pretty empty out there on the edges of the Palouse. The struggle is against loneliness and low wages and hard work and a future of low prospects, and there isn’t much heroic about fighting those. It’s hard to get your ego fed raging against a hay-baler or that danged bitter wind.
The worst of them are little angry men who get a rush from carrying a gun. And they egg each other on over some little bit of news that frustrates them, and soon enough a gang of idiots are carrying out an act of armed sedition. Nothing too dangerous, it’s not like they rushed a National Guard armory, where they might have gotten shot and where the government might have felt compelled to act fast. Nope, they picked their target with a complete lack of courage.
They took over the headquarters of a regional bird sanctuary, and terrorized the nearby small town. You really can’t get much more picayune than that.
What the government ought to do is bring up a unit of trained soldiers, fire a few warning shots, and tell the criminals to lay down their weapons. But I’m sure that’s what is causing some hesitation is the fact that a battle over a bird sanctuary occupied by twits in gimme caps isn’t exactly going to get featured in the curriculum at West Point. It’s not as if Burns, Oregon is a strategic chokepoint in the War on Terror.
These are clowns who got to caper on the evening news in their prior stunt at Bundy Ranch, and now they’re escalating. Their next act of treason will be bolder. I’m afraid it’s time to stop pussyfooting around and shut these bozos down, call them what they are — domestic terrorists — and bring the whole ratpack into court. Without their guns.
It’s not even as if they’re protesting an injustice. The two ranchers they claim to be defending were convicted of setting fires on federal land, and they aren’t arguing against that: instead, they’re trying to claim that these few farmers have right of ownership over land held in federal trust for all of us — they aren’t demanding fair play, they’re demanding to be given big chunks of property which they’ve already been allowed to use for grazing. They aren’t out for truth, justice, and the American way — this is simply a bunch of yahoos committing extortion for personal gain.
Oh, but there is a little something else: religious fanaticism. These are yokel terrorists, high on self-righteousness, believing god has called on them to die for their cause. To die for an undefended building on a bird sanctuary.
What a bunch of goobers.
I doubt these particular yokels are so much religious fanatics, as they are immature, greedy assholes who found Papa Bundy’s fanaticism to be a useful and profitable banner. They get their publicity, they know they’re not going to be carpet-bombed by the Feds (since they’re white) and it’s good fundraising.
Here’s a link to the AUSA’s statement on the “injustice” they’re supposedly protesting:
https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2660399-Statement-USattorney.html
On the other hand they were convicted on charges of terrorism, if that was the straw that broke the camels back I sort of get it. While I don’t have all the facts it’s hard to see how a land dispute could constitute terrorism, but it seems like anything could be shoe-horned into “terrorism” these days.
I can understand why some would protest this, perhaps tipping the balance into the hands of a larger (and far loonier) “separatist” fringe movement. So while I agree in that these actions should be condemned it could also be prudent to question some of the tactics used to combat terrorism.
neverjaunty@1, In the Discuss: Moments of Political Madness thread (starting at the link), Lynna is referencing a strong(?) LDS(morman) connection: Perhaps not (religious) fanatics, but (probably) heavily under the influence. But nonetheless fanatics(e.g., guns). And with very definite connections to Clive Bundy, a well-documented racist morman.
I’ve seen the pictures. They’re pretty typical. A bunch of dudes parading around in the camo carrying high power weapons and issuing threats and bleatings that they’re prepared to die for reasons. I haven’t seen it confirmed as yet but the most recent reports indicated they were starting to bring their families into the bird sanctuary where they’ve holed up. So now, in addition to the acts of “bravery” you’ve mentioned, they might be fixing to use their wives and children as human shields. Wolverines!!11ty!
Erlend Meyer@2, Quoting from Discuss: Moments of Political Madness (text from Rolling Stone):
The law in question is somewhat poorly named the “Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996”, hence the spurious claims of “terrorism”.
I’ve actually been by Malheur National Wildlife Refuge a few times, long ago. It’s about the remotest spot in the lower 48 states. Harney county is bigger than some states and has around 9,000 people and that number has been dropping for decades.
As to what the Feds should or will do. I would just cut the power to the building and blockade it. This area is a high plateau and it gets pretty cold this time of year. They might get cold and hungry and decide watching TV at home is a better idea.
It might not work too fast though. It’s a wildlife refuge and they have lots of guns. They could always shoot the wildlife, drink the lake water and snow, and cook over fires.
I say let them be. They’ll run out of steam after a bit: once the media frenzy dies down a bit it won’t take them too long to tire of playing at revolutionary. No need to risk escalating it, this isn’t worth someone getting hurt over.
1. They did exactly that at the Bundy ranch. Put the women in front of them and dare the Feds to start shooting. Quite courageous IMO, using your family as human shields and cannon fodder. I missed that part in the bible.
2. And just why isn’t that HQ building blockaded already? This is potentially a battle zone. If these reports of reinforcements are correct, once again our multi-billion dollar DHS has dropped the ball.
Ah, that does change things a bit. Still it’s not impossible that local people have made the same error as I did.
The building should be surrounded by either deputy sheriffs, or National Guard troops. Nobody goes in or out. Those trying to go in/resupply, arrested for aiding and abetting terrorism. They are terrorists, and they and their supporters should be treated as such.
This is no unarmed sit-in of a college president’s office with the goal for the university to divest of holdings in South Africa or defense industries. Keep pointing at the guns and threats.
I should point out the “let them be” and “cut the power” and similar suggestions were made in the case of Clive Bundy, who is still holding out(albeit I have no idea how many of the fruitcakes are still there). In this case, however, the people at the centre are convicted criminals (arsonists (with at least one of fires apparently endangering other people)), presumably warranting a more robust response by appropriate Federal agencies (Marshalls? FBI?).
I mis-read that as:
They took over the headquarters of a regional bird sanctuary,
andthat terrorized the nearby small town.And now we can see how school departments are getting SWAT teams and public libraries have armed predator drones. It’s what happens when you get in an arms race with an imbecile.
Sorry – I failed HTML in school…
I wonder if these guys are going to get stamped down just like “occupy” did. I don’t approve of brutal policing, but in this case they seem to be trying to actually be menacing. They were pretty rough on the occupy hippies.
Wow, I’m having a long, drawn-out “Only in America” moment with this. However, even as a non-tax-paying European, I am disappointed by the lacklustre response from the White House and Pentagon. Where’s the inevitable War
onfor Freedom that has to happen whenever the United States are Wrongéd?Okay, so it’s on a marginally smaller scale than previous excuses to launch a war, but at least put ONE aircraft carrier on patrol in one of those shallow marshy streams. That, along with the inevitable airstrikes it will support, should provide plenty of feel-good-givin’-it-to-the-enemy footage reminding everybody why we need a runaway warmachine. Plus, you can get the good old “Mission accomplished” banner out again, because if the combined might of the US and its western allies* can’t
captureliberate, occupy and democratise a bird sanctuary, we might as well stop trying everywhere else.*No promises, but I’m sure we can rally some Spitfire enthusiasts to pack up their collectibles, ship them to the US and strafe the building a few times. Nothing’s too good for our friends across the Atlantic.
‘No school today, kids, not until we get rid off the armed gunmen occupying the bird sanctuary up on the hill.’
Over here kids’ only hope for a day off are icy roads. Only in America…
Adam James @7
Please re-read this part:
The idea that ‘bullies-stop-when-no-one-is-looking’ is a long-discredited pile of horseshit.
It’s more complex than that.
1. The arsonists, the Hammonds, apparently aren’t involved in this and have said it has nothing to do with them.
2. These are the proverbial outside agitators. Few of them, if any, are local. The Bundy mob are from southern Nevada.
The FBI (or whomever’s jurisdiction this falls under) seems to have become much less confrontational in these sorts of situations since Waco.
Addendum:
Actually, this may be a wonderful opportunity for gun-enthusiasts and fans of ‘stand your ground’ legislation. Bascially, you could shoot just about anyone carrying a gun whilst not also wearing a uniform and claim self-defence. When challenged you need only point to the armed mob that invaded American soil, and argue your victim was probably out to get you. Or the the bus stop across the road. Or whatever. After all, your suspicions may have been wrong but at least they were entirely reasonable, no?
The Mad Max future mentioned elsewhere might be coming with great strides. And some people probably can’t wait for it to get here.
Cut their power. Then shine bright lights into the buildings and pump Barney the Dinosaur “I Love You” into their compound in a repeating loop 24/7 at heavy metal volumes.
They’ll be out of there in no time pleading, “NO MORE! Pul-ease! NO MORE!”
Frankly, the BLM has always been remiss in realizing that even granting grazing rights on Federal land abrogates the trust.
The argument has always been that grazing has minimal impact on the land use for others… but that is not so, and clearly has been proven NOT to be so for decades.
this, as an aside to the issue of political control and state of “https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posse_Comitatus_%28organization%29” these yahoos want to impose.
Oh. I know why DHS and the FBI aren’t doing anything. It isn’t just the goober militia. They have god on their side according to their leader, Ammon Bundy.
These aren’t just terrorists, they are xian terrorists. It’s what they are claiming anyway. (It’s actually only half true. While most are probably xian, Bundy is a…Mormon.
If only they were running a hospital. Then we’d be free to bomb the crap out of them.
Does the bird sanctuary have any oil?
why does that shock?
The Mormon’s have been pushing for the destruction (not just overthrow mind) of the US government for generations.
they are the single biggest driving force behind the maintenance of the Posse Comitatus movement, though you’ll never get them to admit it.
also, if one of my ex’s who worked for the IRS for 10 years is to be believed, they have tremendous numbers within government organizations like the IRS, just waiting for the right … “time”.
OTOH, she might have just been imagining things.
Of course not. They’re white terrorists committing armed insurrection in reaction to the government imprisoning arsonists.
If they were unarmed black men nonviolently protesting the government murdering their friends and family, the cops would have stormed the place with tanks and chemical weapons because any tactics are necessary to protect White America from The Other.
I like to think they’re really there for the $1 million that they expect to receive if they stay in that hut for a month with no TV or internet.
Cowards for taking over an unarmed defenseless wildlife sanctuary? Have you ever been attacked by a deranged duck and the randy rampaging rabbits can be pretty deadly.
The gubmint could always wait till they have a goober wedding there and send in the drones.
Then again I don’t think they allow goobers to marry their guns its just un-natural and no God-fearing Registry clerk would sign the papers.
As mentioned above, Harney county has shut down their schools for the week.
This is odd. That wildlife refuge is in the middle of nowhere and nowhere near any of the few schools in the area.
I’m guessing it is an abundance of caution. They are probably afraid one of these nuts will break in and massacre a few or a few dozen kids. Sandy Hook in the Oregon high desert.
Firing warning shots around those paranoids is probably not the best idea. As Kevin Drum suggested, loud music or tear gas might be better choices. Then arrest them, charge them and try them. But don’t think it won’t escalate.
It’s pretty clear that these assholes are both fanatics AND opportunists, a la Westboro. Neither the Hammonds nor the residents of Harney County want them there. When even the sheriff of Harney County thinks you’re an asshole, maybe the Sagebrush Rebellion bullshit is wearing thin:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/oregon-ranchers-reject-cliven-bundy-family-occupation/
PZ might be excused for mislocating the Palouse, since he grew up on the wet side of Washington, but Burns isn’t anywhere near the Palouse – normally considered to be the loess hills between the Snake River and Spokane. And you won’t see much sagebrush – just wheat and lentils
I think one of the main reasons for not sending a couple of companies of infantry in has to do with the memory of the PR headache of Waco Texas. endless replaying of a building burning down with another bunch of terrorists and their victims going up in smoke is not anything anyone wants to give the order for (put there name on)
uncle frogy
Or, as ABC calls it, a .
This sure sounds like an insurrection to me. Call out the militia to put it down.
Seriously, these guys are not a militia by any legal definition. The Constitution says that one of the duties of the militia was to supress insurrection. The fact that there is no government-sanctioned militia any more doesn’t matter. They are insurrecting – militias are pretty much the opposite of insurrection.
The Waco incident had the Feds as the aggressor attacking a compound that was home to scores of people. Bad PR
The difference here, is that the terrorists took over a government building with weapons. They are now the aggressors. A different PR problem, but one that allows for different strategy.
So the government says they are occupying federal property illegally, and their response is to go do exactly that, even more obviously?
There is no way they can hold that building for 30 years, or even 30 days, without the federals allowing them to come and go. Which is again what they have been doing, using federal property with federal compliance.
The building has no use, other than as a symbol. And since the symbol’s name is “wildlife refuge”, it’s going to sound like they are shooting Bambi’s mom. Even others of the gun crowd are going to oppose the reduction in hunting opportunity.
It is the armed takeover of a federal building. I see nothing wrong with calling it terrorism.
It’s probably best not to let them go down in a blaze of glory. These people have dreams of starting their , and it’s probably in everyone’s best interest not to allow them anything that could look like it. They all deserve to be arrested, but make them go out with a whimper instead of a bang by waiting them out and making sure their only option is to surrender to police.
five bucks says you NEVER hear anyone from Fox Noise calling them “Thugs”.
does not fit with the template forced on popular media though. therefore, the problem is, you don’t have enough friends with money.
same problem as any sane and rational person has these days.
Ichthyic wrote:
Nobody’ll take that bet. At this point, I’m just hoping that Fox doesn’t describe them as “patriots”.
*sigh*
you’re right.
Jake Harban @25:
According to news reports, there’s also 50-80 of them occupying the building. They almost certainly outnumber and outgun the county’s law enforcement.
The Feds can just wait them out. This is a place 31 miles from the middle of nowhere with virtually nothing around but a few ranches and miles of sagebrush. And it is rather cold this time of year, snow on the ground right now.
It would be easy to blockade. One road in from the highway. Swampy lake on the other side.
They won’t starve. It is a wildlife refuge after all and they have guns. The lake FWIW, is loaded with fish. Many tons of fish. Almost all champion sized…carp. Snow and the lake for water. What they will need is wood for fire. Not much of that and what is there is green. They are going to be cold a lot.
That is if and when the Feds get their act together. Local reports tonight are that the road in is unguarded and anyone can come and go.
PS I don’t know why anyone wouldn’t call them xian terrorists. They have already claimed to be xians with god on their side. And they are classic terrorists.
no.
it would be very very foolish to let THIS incident become the spark point for a national debate over terrorism laws.
The real question is… these laws were passed in the 1990s… where was the ACLU then? why were these supported by Congress THEN?
it’s far, far too late now. the only thing you can do now by using this event as a trigger is to foment chaotic insurrections by complete idiots.
which will just get more people killed.
Irony.
Personally hoping the Feds don’t blink on this one and call their bluff. It’ll be messy, unpleasant, and wrong, but at some point these idiots need to get a message sent to them that they can’t go around doing shit like this.
nerd I agree it is different but unless president Obama signs off I doubt anyone will want to make a big move they will play a waiting game after all this is not San Bernardino and no one has been killed yet. and many who are in charge are risk averse not so much the “grunts” on the front line.
uncle frogy
I’m partial to “Y’all-Qaeda” myself. But on another note – and not that I’d ever be seen agreeing with these idiots in broad daylight – the idea that someone can be prosecuted for burning brush on public land under an anti-terror law should scare anyone to death.
My wife and I spent a few days in Malheur NWR about 20 years ago. I’m not sure how teeming with wildlife it will be in the middle of winter. The wildlife refuge is mostly known for its birds, and they’re mostly gone this time of year. There are other critters, but there’s also been a four-year drought, and much of the water is gone.
I’m not one for violence, but I’m also sick of anti-government bullies getting away with this kind of bullshit. I wish the Feds were capable of responding competently and forthrightly with this, with no killing but some concerted blockading. But I won’t hold my breath. For how much we spend on our armed representatives, both here and abroad, they sure manage to to kill lots of folks. They just don’t seem able to solve any of the problems they claim the killing is for. Not that it would be worth it, anyway. It’s just even more worthless when it’ so utterly pointless.
That never happened. The Hammonds were prosecuted for arson.
These are BTW, not nice people. The younger Hammond was seen slaughtering a herd of deer, killing at least 7. He then started a fire to cover up the evidence. Which spread to public land. I don’t see the point in slaughtering a herd of mule deer.
treefrogdundee at 50: Read the link at comment 1. While I agree that five years might be excessive, they were convicted of arson, not ‘burning brush’, and putting specific lives in danger — twice. They lit at least one fire to cover up evidence of poaching. They had been warned in the past about it, too, which makes me think other fires had been lit.
And even they don’t support the yahoos who’ve used their ‘Second Amendment Rights’ to terrorize all of us. This is a very deliberate attack on the very idea of Federal lands.
If someone can help me clear this up once and for all, I would appreciate it. I’ve heard mixed things including (from a reputable news source) that they were in fact sentenced under anti-terror legislation. I don’t have any sympathy for them (and even less for Bundy). But my understanding is that their original sentences were served and then a longer sentence was imposed specifically under a 1996 anti-terror law (it was decided that the original sentences did not meet the 5 years minimum of said terror law). Again, it isn’t the outcome (prison) that concerns me but the growing willingness of prosecutors and judges to use the sledgehammer of “terrorism” to hand out extremely severe prison terms… not in this case but over the last decade.
http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2015/10/controversial_oregon_ranchers.html
For example, this…
The anti-terror bill is what introduced mandatory minimums for arson of government property. That doesn’t mean they were charged with terrorism (or even suspected of it), or that the mandatory minimum imposed in the bill had much to do with the so-called “war on terror”. The mandatory minimums are mandated by law, so the prosecutor and judges are supposed to seek and impose them.
Frog, read the US attorney’s statement in Comment 1. The Hammonds were never charged with terrorism.
If you read that in the media it has an explanation. They get things wrong sometimes.
@treefrogdundee
From what I’ve read, they were prosecuted for arson, not terrorism. A law passed in 1996 (and thus not a “terror law” in the same way the term is used nowadays) states that arson on public land carries a five year prison term. Initially, they were sentenced to less than five years, but prosecutors demanded the five-year sentence the law requires and so they were resentenced accordingly.
The law mandating the five-year sentence for arson on public lands references “terrorism” in its name, but that’s pretty much the extent of the connection.
I’ll add here that setting fires in the summer in this area is extremely dangerous. This is high desert. DESERT!!! As in you know, not much rain.
Huge range fires in this area are common. One a few years ago in Oregon burned 800,000 acres. That is a lot. This year there were two major fires in the general area that caused a lot of property damage. One a ways north and one slightly east that burned a good chunk of Idaho. Once these fires get going with windy conditions, there is no way to stop them. At that point, fire fighting is attempting to protect homes and minimize the number of dead people.
Using force and threats of violence to make the government comply with your demands is the textbook definition of terrorism.
Also, aww, did mandatory minimum sentences* they adamantly support when it’s a black kid smoking marihuana come to bit their ass? Hear me play the world’s smallest violin.
If you read the article it becomes clear that these guys didn’t accidentally set fire once. They repeatedly did so and obviously didn’t give a fuck that they kept burning federal land and that they had no permission to do so. Textbook example of people who think themselves to be above the law…
Can anyone comment on how much this is or is not being covered by mainstream media in the US and if it is covered how it is being played? I’ve heard about it from facebook, here, and Der Spiegel.
I wonder what it would be called if, say, a group of 300 or so armed Islamic people took over a similar building to protest the sentencing of someone at their mosque to 5 years for a similar level of crime? A peaceful protest? A situation? I can’t help but think that the “T” word would be invoked. Furthermore, I think it would be appropriate: A bunch of armed individuals with fanatic beliefs take over a federal building and invite other like minded individuals to join them and “bring your weapons with you” (my back translation of Der Spiegel’s translation of the actual quote–sorry for any inaccuracies). Maybe terrorism is the wrong word. Sedition or treason might be more accurate.
Oh, FFS. From al Jazeera’s coverage http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/01/continues-siege-oregon-government-building-160104035440186.html
“The Hammonds, who are set to turn themselves in Monday afternoon, have made it clear that they don’t want help from the Bundy group.
“Neither Ammon Bundy nor anyone within his group/organisation speak for the Hammond family,” the Hammonds’ lawyer W. Alan Schroeder wrote to Sheriff Ward.”
The Hammonds don’t even want the Bundy’s “help”. WTF do they think they’re doing?
@27 garydargan
Not a duck, but 3 year old VK was chased. menaced, and nearly bitten on the bottom by a swan.
Yes, I was close to being goosed by a waterfowl.
Waiting them out seems like a good option, but we should definitely annoy them and make fun of them too. It might be funny to send a robot to spray-paint the windows of that building. Let them sit in the cold dark and not be able to see what’s happening outside. Oh, and play Noam Chomsky books on tape at high volume.
I’d rather not kill any of them if possible. Last thing we need is loon martyrs.
Most of these guys are “three-per-centers” and “sovereign citizens” who believe the line of B.S. that’s been fed to them that they are beholden to none, may disregard any law enforcement that is not the local county sheriff, and can make their own license plates and coin their own money — false checks they call sight drafts. They buy into all this stuff that’s mostly sold at fringe right websites, gun shows and broadcasts on shortwave radio. It is of course nothing but a poisonous fantasy.
These guys with guns may be able to feed themselves with game, at least sporadically, but what will they do for veggies if they’re blockaded and can’t get to the Safeway? How long will it take before they get scurvy and their gums are too sore to chew their venison and their sandhill crane drumsticks? Prickly pears are a good source of vitamin C but the season is mostly over.
Also it amuses me that they rallied to the support of arsonists in a town called Burns.
Five years for arson seems steep, as many US war-on-crime punishments are. I wish “cruel and unusual” had been used there to wipe out the mandatory minimums there (judges have been pushing somewhat effectively here in Canada).
It’s a question largely unrelated to what the militia is doing, though.
Militias everywhere in the world do this, which is why countries with good governance don’t allow them.
bring the whole ratpack into court
My prediction:
When they finally decide to go home they will be give safe conduct passes and a promise that none of them will ever have to appear in court for anything that happened in Burns.
To Gitmo with all of them. No charges. Don’t open the cell doors until there’s nothing left but dust.
It’s perfectly legal, after all. That’s the ‘freedom’ this type of yahoo has gifted this country with.
Lucky none of them are a black child with a toy gun or the bodies would be piled up already.
Since Bundy’s defenders are tied up at the moment, a good time to confiscate Bundy’s cattle on public land without paid grazing fees.
numberobis @ 68:
Normally, I’d agree. This wasn’t just a case of one-time arson, though. It was a pattern of behaviour. Also, it’s been pointed out, many times, that their initial sentence was not five years.
As someone who lives rural, I can say fire is one of the scariest damn things – all it takes is one fire to get out of control, and you have devastating damage. Lately, where I live, farmers have been taking to setting old tumbledown houses on fire, claiming it’s the easiest way to get rid of them. As there’s usually little left to a tumbledown, that could be seriously argued, and I expect it’s a combination of laziness and “fire fun!”, which is not a good combination.
#59: I agree. I spent a fair bit of time up farther north, in the eastern side of Washington state, and fires are not and should not be taken lightly. When I was visiting family this past summer that was all the news — the fires that were raging along the Columbia, and we met with an old high school friend who had his home completely destroyed by fires. Someone who is setting fires to destroy evidence of poaching is quite simply a dangerous criminal. People die in those fires, either residents or the firefighters who risk their lives trying to put them out.
Five bucks that Foxwit News will call them patriots is a much surer bet
Arson is one of the safest ways to end your ass in prison, even in liberal Germany. Because fire is hard to plan and control.
Giliell @ 76:
Yes, and that is seriously magnified in rural areas, simply because it takes time to marshal adequate fire fighting people and equipment, while the fire rages on, unchecked.
I must disagree on one thing with Our Gracious Host. He says:
“What the government ought to do is bring up a unit of trained soldiers, fire a few warning shots, and tell the criminals to lay down their weapons. But I’m sure that’s what is causing some hesitation is the fact that a battle over a bird sanctuary occupied by twits in gimme caps isn’t exactly going to get featured in the curriculum at West Point. It’s not as if Burns, Oregon is a strategic chokepoint in the War on Terror.”
No can do. Using military personnel to enforce domestic law within the United States is explicitly prohibited by the Posse Comitatus Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1385. That’s why this sort of thing is never going to “get featured in the curriculum at West Point”… at least not so long as there’s at least lip service to the rule of law at the military academies.* Those who reference “call out the National Guard” as some kind of rebuttal have never seen a National Guard peacekeeping operation, or had any real idea of the restrictions under which those operations take place.
Ironically, however, this means that people who are even less well trained for taking an improvised fortification held by armed hostile persons is, by law, in charge of doing so: The FBI. But that’s for another time.
* Don’t get me started. I was a career officer, but I had a real education and earned my commission through ROTC, three decades ago. There are a lot of loopholes everywhere, to say the least… and all too often some of the absolutely necessary civilian control of the military is exercised in bad faith, usually leaving the military holding the bag (although on more than one occasions the problems have been purely uniformed in origin, too).
#18:
Please stop that right now. That is NOT how self defense law works, and it’s not how stand your ground works. What you are describing is a crime. Do not advocate the commission of crimes.
It’s one thing to support regulation (or the outright ban) of guns, or to oppose castle and stand-your-ground laws. It’s quite another to lie about what the laws say, and to advocate criminal acts.
Cliven is the Reason for the Treason.
We never should have stood down in Nevada. But I disagree about initial use of force; we need to freeze their assets back home, while they freeze their asses in the dark.
Damn trailer-Daesh.
There’s some backstory here I haven’t seen mentioned much. These Hammonds have a long Bundyesque history of flouting the law and butting heads with the feds over this land-rights bullshit. According to this article from way back in 1994:
They may be distancing themselves from the current coup d’machismo but they are basically co-conspirators nevertheless.
Chas @ 81:
Thanks for that information. Also, coup d’machismo is perfect. I was attempting a description in the second thread, and that covers it elegantly.
If they weren’t a bunch of mormons I’d wonder if they weren’t trying to reenact the whiskey rebellion.
#78: That’s actually a very good point. Stable societies have had rules like that for a long time — Roman legions, for instance, were not allowed in Rome. And when the military was used to control internal affairs, that was the beginning of the end.
I retract the suggestion.
I also don’t want anyone to think I favor blowing up or murdering anyone. But some action to force them to give up their efforts has to be taken, and we have to end this game of letting tea party militias walk all over the law. The Bundys ought to have their revenue stream — profits from federal lands — shut down immediately.
Caine@73:
Their initial sentence was three months for one and a year for the other. Seems reasonable for a serious crime like arson. Death threats and illegal grazing should likely get them extra time — but for death threats and illegal grazing, not for arson.
numerobis:
Yeah, maybe, if someone doesn’t have an established pattern of setting fires, and stops setting fucking fires. I’m pretty much ready to tell anyone trying to sob over these asses getting five years to fuck right the fuck off.
As I have already pointed out, I live rural, and the biggest nightmare anyone rural can face is a fucking fire. It takes very little for a fire to get out of control, and the damage is unfuckingbelievable, and people die. So, you want to sob over 5 years, take it the fuck somewhere else.
Speaking of ways to get these twits out of the building they’re in, well, they’re claiming to be Bible Men, so I say look for some Biblical inspiration.
Specifically, I think we should use drones to deliver a plague of fleas, ticks, and lice into the building they’re in.
84: Thank you, kind sir, and I apologize for the uncaffeinated typos and subject-verb disagreements.
I want to expand on one thing — my snide remark about the FBI. There are two problems with leaving response to the FBI (and believe me, other federal agencies are on balance worse, especially since the TRAITOR Act {aka USA PATRIOT Act} moved the best of them into the kneejerkish-by-definition Gehaimstaatssicherheitsburo):
(1) The FBI’s culture is split, and not in a good way. The basic purpose of the FBI is reacting to completed criminal acts (that’s hinted at by “of Investigation” in the name). The training of all FBI personnel starts from that premise. In short, the FBI isn’t a proactive organization… except when it comes to those times that the FBI intervenes in an incomplete criminal act. Then we end up with the equivalent of SWAT teams that too seldom question whether there’s a nonviolent alternative, let alone limit “collateral damage.” And there’s a lot of institutional tension between those roles, nonparallel promotion opportunities, etc., etc., etc. In short, the FBI’s structure just isn’t very good for active intervention in incomplete acts.
(2) More broadly, the lack of effective nonlethal ranged force — a serious problem throughout all of American law enforcement — makes things much worse. It’s all too similar to the problems with the “all-nuclear military” proposals in the late 1940s, and the casualty lists in Korea and Vietnam sort of demonstrate the fallacy of those proposals. By not giving law enforcement effective nonlethal ranged options (Tasers don’t count, from a “range” or “effectiveness” point of view, let alone an economic one), we don’t encourage lawbreakers to do any less themselves. And the FBI, sadly, is a hyper-gun-culture law enforcement organization, and the portions of the FBI that intervene in ongoing situations moreso than is Delta Force.
In light of the above, I endorse the “play Barney at heavy-metal volume” proposal; it will certainly have a lower body count and less collateral damage, notwithstanding the insanity imposed on the entire community…
And I’m not doing much better for typos today…
I think it’s easy to misjudge exactly how serious arson can become, whether it’s a building or brush or woods being set on fire. Anyone who doesn’t live rurally or in Australia probably has no real idea at how quickly a fire can get out of hand, esp. during the dry season under the right (wrong?) wind conditions. Three months seems woefully small, especially for a repeat offender. A look at Australian law, by state, on the matter of arson; the penalties are generally pretty darned steep.
While I like the idea of using loud music instead of guns, I wouldn’t play the Barney theme at them. Given the sort of bigoted arseholes we’re dealing with here, hip-hop 24/7 is the way to go.
rq:
Even though I’ve emphasised the nightmare of rural fires, it’s not just rural. I’m a native Southern Californian, and every year of my life, there was a bloody fire raging for days, weeks, sometimes months, during the Santa Ana winds, when everything was tinder dry and the tiniest spark could send everything up in flames. Most of the time, Santa Ana fueled fires weren’t deliberate, but there were cases of arson, and yes, the consequence for setting half the fucking state on fire was very steep indeed. People who have never seen such a fire might be excused for thinking penalties are too severe, but once you’ve seen what can happen, you stop thinking that way in a hurry.
Caine
Yes, you’re right, not just rural. Thanks for that addendum/correction. I suppose it’s just a matter of thinking within the Urban Bubble on my part – you know, ‘horrible fires happen out there, never in here, we’re all safe in here!’. :)
(Though I did grow up rurally, it was a very temperate/wetlands kind of rural, so no forest fires… heard about those from the cousins in Australia, though. *whew*)
Apparently, the terrorists didn’t plan well and have put out a desperate call for snacks. Why is it even possible for snacks to get in to them? Just don’t let anyone in and sit around outside having pizza and things should resolve naturally within a few days. If we’re picking loud music to play to them, though, how about Die Toten Hosen? Too likely to be misinterpreted as support by English monolingists?
Dianne @ 94:
I’ve linked several news stories in the second thread. Apparently, the Parks service is going to cut off power, and temps are subzero.
I can’t imagine why they haven’t done that already, but glad they’re finally getting around to it.
Actually, forget the music. How about the horde makes a recording detailing all the ways these idiots have failed as US-Americans, militia members, survivalists, libertarians, or even revolutionaries and we play that at them 24/7? We should have at least enough material to make a recording that lasts a good 2-3 days before repeating itself.
The Hammonds sound like really nice people who are totally not endangering other folks
Giliell @ 98:
Christ. And people want to defend these assholes. Right.
I wonder how president Trump would handle this “crisis”
@ Jake Harban,
Regardless of whether or not the law used to sentence them was passed prior to or after 9/11, it is still a terror law if for no other reason than it says so in its title. In a day and age where small children can have their names added to the no-fly list, anything that even approaches “terror” crime and punishment should be used very sparingly because overreaction in this country has become standard. Burning brush on empty state land does not equate with arson (burning things with the intent or possibility of it harming other people or property). Again, I have zero sympathy for them and think they should have been in jail. But five years for this particular action is insane and using something that can even be interpreted as a terror law sets a dangerous precedent… a future Republican president, for example, using it against environmental protesters.
@treefrogdundee:
You should really come over and see what one of these wildfires are like before you brush off what happened as “burning brush on empty state land.” Peoples’ lives and property were put in danger by the fires these yahoos set. The intentional starting of wildfires is a very serious problem in the Western US.
dianne@97: how about playing that video of Paul Elam and drunk friends calling Sarkeesian names. On loop. Played on an LRAD.
treefrogdundee
Did you read the article I linked to? They recklessly endangered people both times they set fire, the first time campers they knew were there AND their own grandson/nephew, the second time the firefighters for whose protection there had been an explicit “no intentional fires” ban
No, I haven’t read the article. I was going off of other news services that essentially described it as vacant land. My mistake.
The penalty for arson in Australia used to be death. One year is a light sentence. Here is why the penalties are severe in Australia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Saturday_bushfires
treefrogdundee:
The fuck it doesn’t. Arson is the deliberate act of setting something on fire. Also, the first fire they set? 139 acres burned. That’s not “yeah, getting rid of some brush” for fuck’s sake.
Jaws @78 :
If you read the act, you’ll see that it specifies that only the Army and Air force are subject to the act.
The US Navy, and it’s stepchild the United States Marine Corps are not covered under the act.
By the way, it was originally written in the 1870s to force the Federal government to move union army troops out of the reconstruction south, so as to give the Klan free reign.
A historical reference, the Clinton Administration sent in marines from Camp Pendleton to keep the peace during the 1992 Los Angeles riots.
Not to worry – we’ve got the ABA (American Birding Association) on the case: these nimrods should have know better than to take over a bird sanctuary!
http://www.breakingburgh.com/enraged-birders-to-retake-oregon-wildlife-refuge-in-dawn-offensive/
Here’s an inventory of their storeroom click
I think you’re not at risk of an armed takeover by those folks
Ah, but at least they have Freedom to fill they bellies, Liberty to quench their thirst and the flame of Patriotism to keep them warm. Or something. At least they brought some weights. An appropriate choice since weight lifting seems to be a cliché of a pass-time in prison.
But after seeing the picture of their food supply I’m curious to see their arsenal. Did they go all out, filling it to the top, leaving them no space to bring some actual provisions along? Or is it a similarly ragged collection? A few rifles, a few rounds, just enough to scare and hurt some people and then … well, thinking ahead clearly isn’t part of the game.
Guess they should have swung over to Bend and gone to Costco first.
Well, don’t worry, PETA is there to help and support them
108: The statute, it is true, specifies Army (later including Air Force because the Air Force was part of the Army until 1947). However, there are multiple DOD-level directives, and even several Department of the Navy directives, that explicitly adopt Posse Comitatus except on the high seas (when even if it’s a US-flagged vessel, the Navy and Marines can engage in “mere” law enforcement).
No need to send in the marines. It is a long way from Guadalcanal or Iwo Jima. Just send in some drones. They can’t read the Possee Comitatus act. Better still paint the confederate flag on the drones. After all no body loves a false-flag conspiracy theory more than a Foxwit News-watching, gun-fondling goober. That way they’ll have something to genuinely complain about.
This document from the BLM, explaining why they did NOT renew the Hammond grazing permit, goes into detail about their fire-bug activities from the arson trials. And their mistreatment of the refuge and the staff at the refuge.
http://wildfiretoday.com/documents/Hammond_grazing_decision.pdf
1 – Knowingly starting a fire downhill from a sleeping camp of wildland fire fighters. (the crew had to move, because fire burns uphill very quickly)
2 – Starting a fire on the protected side of a firebreak, hoping to help the fire keep going towards their land where they wanted some juniper burned to give them better grazing … in AUGUST in the middle of the dry season.
3 – Starting fires that “lit in” (boxed in with flames) some fire crews.
4 – bragging about it
Basically, they weren’t willing to wait until it was safest to do controlled burns and were using the lightning-caused fires as cover for their arson. Because they wanted more grass for their cows. Fuck the wildlife, other people’s grazing leases and anyone who might get burned out or killed because their arson, they wanted mo’ grass for mo’ cows and mo’ money!
NOTE that they had an airplane to use to survey the results of the poaching cover-up. This is not a hardscrabble ranching family barely making it on a hostile range. Planes don’t just wander in to be adopted.
=========
Also this, from a website that covers wildfire history and management.
http://wildfiretoday.com/2016/01/05/the-timeline-for-the-oregon-rancher-arsonists/
treefrogdundee,
I have had friends die fighting fires on “empty state land”. Five years for serial arsonists is way to short in my view.