RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Ash writes: "To allow the Bundy brothers and their supporters to remain in control of a U.S. federal installation, fully armed, while federal law enforcement effectively does and says nothing, is a wide-open invitation to disaster."

Jan. 6, 2016: Ammon Bundy in possession, along with his armed supporters, of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge building near Burns, Oregon holds court with reporters. (photo: Rick Bowmer/AP)
Jan. 6, 2016: Ammon Bundy in possession, along with his armed supporters, of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge building near Burns, Oregon holds court with reporters. (photo: Rick Bowmer/AP)


ALSO SEE: Marc Ash | Where Were the Soldier-Cops at Bundy Ranch?

A Very Bad Idea in Oregon

By Marc Ash, Reader Supported News

10 January 16

 

o allow the Bundy brothers and their supporters to remain in control of a U.S. federal installation, fully armed, while federal law enforcement effectively does and says nothing, is a wide-open invitation to disaster.

The Obama administration’s decision in March 2014 to withdraw federal personnel from the Bundy Ranch in Clark County, Nevada, laid the groundwork for the storming of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Burns, Oregon, that now unfolds. The folly of that decision was obvious then and the result is all too clear now. The current situation in Oregon is the direct consequence of inaction at the Bundy Ranch.

This approach to meeting a direct, armed challenge to federal authority is totally unprecedented in U.S. history. If you run once, you will run again. Right now this is a small cadre of disgruntled misfits. But if this ragtag self-appointed militia can back the Obama administration and federal law enforcement down again, this will absolutely become an emboldened movement.

The Obama administration’s handling of this situation is not only dangerously short-sighted but also racist. By treating the armed white protesters as different and somehow more equal than protesters in Ferguson, Missouri, or Oakland, California, or on Wall Street, President Obama and all of federal law enforcement bow down to, actually facilitate, armed white supremacy.

Fear of a Waco or Ruby Ridge repeat is absolutely no rationale whatsoever for directing federal law enforcement to back down in the face of an armed takeover of an active federal installation. The situations in Waco and Ruby Ridge were totally different. No one at the Branch Davidian compound or the Weaver cabin sought a confrontation with federal law enforcement. The Bundys and their numerous, heavily-armed supporters do.

The longer the federal government waits to act, the more complicated and dangerous the situation becomes. Emboldened by the apparent success of the initial takeover in Oregon, additional armed supporters are arriving at the site. They are considering advanced military tactics that will make substantial bloodshed significantly more likely – not less. If this force is allowed to continue to grow, supply, and fortify, dislodging them will require a full military confrontation.

The current position of the Justice Department is that they are allowing local law enforcement to handle it. That is absurd on its face. The Harney County Sheriff’s Department is already totally outmanned and outgunned. They would have no chance whatsoever against this force, many of whose members are former military.

In any case, from a jurisdictional perspective it is not a state or local matter at all. It expressly falls within federal jurisdiction. The land is federal land, the subjects crossed numerous state lines to come to the site, and the facility under siege is a federal facility. Deferring to local authority under these circumstances has no basis in law whatsoever.

The risk of inaction greatly outweighs the risk of action. The lesson of Waco and Ruby Ridge is – professionalism matters. Proceed with wisdom and good judgement. But proceed with resolve, before this situation reaches a critical mass that may dwarf the current problem.


Marc Ash is the founder and former Executive Director of Truthout, and is now founder and Editor of Reader Supported News.

Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.


e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
-103 # indian weaver 2016-01-10 12:53
The critical mass has already been achieved. We know that we can back down and defeat any government armed force now, easily. I can only hope a few 1000 more White Supremacists show up, armed to the teeth, and start shooting. Then the White Supremacists can take over whatever they want henceforth. We won't have to wait long now that we see the White Supremacist fascist Obama regime has allied with the seditionists.
 
 
+52 # Radscal 2016-01-10 14:21
Consider how easily the corporate media has engendered such blood lust in a "liberal."

You already know how easily the "conservatives" can be lathered into blood lust. Aren't we better than that?
 
 
+34 # bardphile 2016-01-10 15:29
Agreed. I hope we're better. We should be better.
 
 
+18 # Lucretius 2016-01-10 15:59
These people would not hesitate to murder stupid liberals. They have already murdered two police officers in Nevada to celebrate the Federal backoff in Nevada.
 
 
+63 # bmiluski 2016-01-10 14:23
I'm sorry what, weaver? White Supremacist fascist Obama regime????
Somewhat oxymoronic, no?? Oh but wait, let's consider the moronic source.
 
 
+35 # dipierro4 2016-01-10 15:37
I don't follow this blog closely, but I suspect that Indian Weaver was being sarcastic.
 
 
+21 # economagic 2016-01-10 16:08
I do follow pretty closely, and I'm pretty sure you are correct unless Weaver has gone over the edge of despair. ("Sarcastic" is hardly a strong enough term, but my old-style Roget's doesn't offer much better: derisive; railing; snorting; Rabelaisian; burlesque (sic); farcical.)
 
 
+19 # bmiluski 2016-01-10 16:19
I follow this blog everyday and, unfortunately, Indian Weaver is NOT being sarcastic. He accuses President Obama of fascism and murder in every post.
 
 
-1 # randrjwr 2016-01-14 00:29
Quoting bmiluski:
I follow this blog everyday and, unfortunately, Indian Weaver is NOT being sarcastic. He accuses President Obama of fascism and murder in every post.


Well, what else would one call Obama's outrageous use of drones? But, it has also occurred to me that Obama may have a gun pointed at his head, much as JFK had. JFK knew it was there, but still acted with much more integrity than has Obama, with, as we know, very unfortunate (for us all as well as for himself) results.
 
 
+37 # ericlipps 2016-01-10 14:52
Quoting indian weaver:
The critical mass has already been achieved. We know that we can back down and defeat any government armed force now, easily. I can only hope a few 1000 more White Supremacists show up, armed to the teeth, and start shooting. Then the White Supremacists can take over whatever they want henceforth. We won't have to wait long now that we see the White Supremacist fascist Obama regime has allied with the seditionists.

Are you for real? A "white supremacist" federal government with a black president?
 
 
-38 # RMDC 2016-01-10 15:11
Yes, he is real. Obama is a black lackey of a white supremacist government. White supremacists have always hired dark skinned people to work for them. Obama is a very good worker for them. He sure as hell is not working for dark skinned people. He sure as hell is obsequious to white racists.
 
 
-26 # economagic 2016-01-10 16:00
And this draws thumbs down? For factual inaccuracy, or simply because the prospect is too horrible for some people even to consider? No wonder we find oursleves behind the eight ball.
 
 
+25 # bmiluski 2016-01-10 16:21
Wow, you people will make up any fairy tale to support your neo-con lies.
 
 
+15 # RMDC 2016-01-10 17:32
bmil -- Obama is a neocon. That is the reason I hate him. He ran for office in 2008 as a progressive and anti-neocon. But once in office, his real true neocon colors came out. He is the lackey for the neocons or maybe just a real neocon himself. Whatever he is, the neocons suck. They are what is wrong with the world now.
 
 
+8 # RMDC 2016-01-10 18:55
I guess there are people on this board who do not know Obama is a neocon!!!!! Do they also not know that Hillary is a neocon?? There's must be some ostriches here. they have their heads buried deeply in the sand so they won't have to see what is going on around them. The visions that appear before their eyes (deep in the sand) are good enough for reality.
 
 
+12 # lfeuille 2016-01-11 00:28
There are also people here who don't really know what neo-con means. They seem to think it just means a former liberal who adopts a generally conservative outlook. They don't understand that it refers specifically to foreign policy especially hawkish military policy in general and especially concerning the "defense" of Israel. Hillary definitely qualifies. Obama qualifies by his actions which sometimes seem half hearted, but nevertheless he won't break with the neocons in his own administration. RDMC definitely does not qualify as a neocon.
 
 
+9 # bmiluski 2016-01-11 09:36
I guess that there are people on this board that forget that President Obama faced the full force of the repug party to make sure he was a one term president. That meant obstructionalis m on a scale never seen before. In order to get ANYTHING accomplished he had to concede to some of their demands.
 
 
-2 # Diane_Wilkinson_Trefethen_aka_tref 2016-01-11 16:31
@bmiluski – your argument is a logical fallacy. The fact that Obama faced obstruction from the Republicans does not alter that HE chose the actions he did. Your point is understandable but from a logical point of view, your argument could justify Obama nuking Moscow if that were a condition by the Republicans for their going along with one of his pet projects. Yes he faced obstruction and yes he no doubt had to make concessions but no, his choices aren’t BECAUSE of the Republicans. They were a consequence of the choices he made and are therefore his responsibility and his alone.
 
 
0 # lfeuille 2016-01-12 01:30
Quoting bmiluski:
I guess that there are people on this board that forget that President Obama faced the full force of the repug party to make sure he was a one term president. That meant obstructionalism on a scale never seen before. In order to get ANYTHING accomplished he had to concede to some of their demands.

This is beside the point. He never tried. He chose his foreign policy team who carried out the continuation of Bush policies. He had other choices. And the president has a fair amount of discretion in foreign policy that is beyond the reach of congress.

And I notice you are still misusing the term neocon.
 
 
+4 # Oyster 2016-01-11 06:00
RMDC is simply stating obvious. Count how many countries / nations he bombed; look at how he works hand-in-hand with neo-liberals. It is indisputable that he is a neocon (in MLK's clothes). Only neocons hire other neocons.
 
 
-4 # Diane_Wilkinson_Trefethen_aka_tref 2016-01-11 15:32
Don't know why you are drawing so many thumbs down. Your facts are good so it must be your not being PC enough that is provoking our fellow readers. Perhaps you should have said, "Obama has been co-opted by the white power structure in our Federal government." Maybe your blunt language is too hard for some to take.
 
 
+157 # Tippitc 2016-01-10 13:25
Talk about the Keystone Cops - this is the dumbest thing I have seen in a LONG time!! Who is running this mess?! Lock this place down - no one goes in, no one comes out. Turn the power off, which would probably stop the water also - and wait. Soon these tough guys will be cold and hungry enough, they will come out of there. And for petes sake - DO NOT give them a soapbox!!! To say that the clowns are running the circus would be giving them way too much credit!!
 
 
+91 # Old4Poor 2016-01-10 14:06
And, now, reinforcements are arriving! Why on Earth is anyone else allowed in?

Unless they are planning to get as many as possible in one isolated place and send in a drone.
 
 
+33 # bmiluski 2016-01-10 14:24
My thoughts exactly Tippitc.
 
 
+54 # Radscal 2016-01-10 14:25
Exactly!

The Feds should have cut off their supply lines on Day One. By Day Two, these "militiamen" were already posting to social media that they needed "cold weather socks" and "snacks." These nuts could have been cut off and starved/frozen out in no time at all.

The fact that the Feds did not do this, and are actually allowing more armed thugs in suggests something more is going on here than we're reading in the corporate media.

Check out this fascinating exploration of the two “militiamen” who organized and are leading this "protest."

http://www.globalresearch.ca/is-the-oregon-occupation-being-stage-managed/5499956
 
 
+7 # lorenbliss 2016-01-11 03:29
Two points:

(1)-Thank you, Radscal, for the Global Research link -- a very thought-provoki ng analysis indeed, particularly of the possible Gaponischka elements in the Oregon event.

(2)-My own contribution to that analysis would be to suggest yet another alternative: that the government, its abject terror of a Leftist rebellion already proven by its suppression of Occupy and Black Lives Matter, has in fact made a secret alliance with the militias. Before Germany went officially Nazi, its governments often relied on SA storm troopers to help suppress Leftist protest and agitation. Especially given the profound influence Nazi war criminals had in shaping the present-day United States, there is no reason to believe the same strategy and tactics are not being applied here and now.

Indeed, per Occam's Razor, that hypothesis explains all the variables cited in the Global Research analysis.
 
 
0 # Radscal 2016-01-11 14:25
Indeed. With this Ryan character having a background in military intelligence, and the lack of a government crackdown on these groups wherever they rise up, the possibility that this Oregon event is orchestrated at some level by elements of the US government must be considered.
 
 
-63 # babaregi 2016-01-10 14:03
Words matter, this "Federal installation" is a very modest little building (see link), it's not the Oklahoma Federal Building that Timothy McVea bombed. BTW, the Waco Siege was his motivation for the bombing.

https://sp.yimg.com/xj/th?id=OIP.M84b668ca7b8fc7738d65409c2a0ebb9ao0&pid=15.1&P=0&w=300&h=300

Presenting this as an issue of White Supremacy when it is about a land use problem is another Liberal technique to spin the story.

This has little to do with Ferguson or Occupy Wall Street except that it is a protest (albeit in the middle of nowhere).

I do hope it can be peacefully resolved but in the end it may require killing people that are arming themselves against the Rule of Law. That is how the Law is ultimately enforced. There have been uprisings in our history before and the Federal Government put them down.

I know you Liberal folks really hate these
these guys and would love to see them blown away for violating the Law while you're supporting Illegal Aliens streaming in unopposed (that's a land use issue too).

According to progressives, Immigration Law should not be enforced because it's "racist" but making that exception to the Law while enforcing others is hypocritical.

Using guns or sneaking into the country are merely different uses of "force" to obtain resources against the will of the owners.
 
 
+64 # bmiluski 2016-01-10 14:26
Thanks babaregi for confusing to unrelated topics into one obnoxious neo-con rant.
 
 
-61 # babaregi 2016-01-10 14:37
Quoting bmiluski:
Thanks babaregi for confusing to unrelated topics into one obnoxious neo-con rant.


You Liberals are the ones constantly bringing up racism as the main factor in how the Law is applied and should be applied.

You would rather focus on convenient talking points and ignore others that show your hypocrisy.
 
 
-11 # oudihasan 2016-01-10 14:26
Presenting this as an issue of White Supremacy when it is about a land use problem is another Liberal technique to spin the story.

It is an issue about White Supremaccy because we all know that if these guys were black (or Native Amaerican or Muslim, they'd all be dead by now.

An appripriate handling would be to take these guys, put them all in blackface, and send each one to some small town local jail.
 
 
-31 # babaregi 2016-01-10 14:46
Quoting oudihasan:
Presenting this as an issue of White Supremacy when it is about a land use problem is another Liberal technique to spin the story.

It is an issue about White Supremaccy because we all know that if these guys were black (or Native Amaerican or Muslim, they'd all be dead by now.

An appripriate handling would be to take these guys, put them all in blackface, and send each one to some small town local jail.


No, it's because there are lots of these guys with guns out in the population and the government respects the ability of groups to apply force and would rather minimize the bloodshed through negotiation first. Minorities have to be more careful because they don't have as much power but as their numbers grow they can safely exert more force and get away with it.
 
 
-32 # MidwestTom 2016-01-10 15:58
Obama early on set the stage when he announced that he would not enforce some existing laws. So did his action give the green light to any group opposed to a given law or Federal action?

Has any other President taken office and almost immediately announced that he is not going to enforce any other given passed law?

Once we start to become lawless, chaos cannot be far behind. Which is why Obama in 2008 promised to build a civilian army larger than the US Army, and he has done it.
 
 
-2 # bmiluski 2016-01-11 09:39
You see what I mean, dipierro4? Just more senseless anti-Obama vomit.
 
 
+27 # cmp 2016-01-10 14:18
Isn't it more like these people already own the land but, that just isn't good enough?

..( and isn't it funny, that for Occupy, the Fed's were more than obliged to assist in staging the protesters as, "MADE FOR MEDIA Images of Violence" .. even though they knew directly that the organizers were instructing all participants to not pose any threat to persons or property)

.. (and, isn't funny how the Gulf was declared a "No Fly Zone" (No Pictures, Video, etc) as the Deep Water Horizon flowed on for months with the worst ecological disaster in history)

Does the Second Amendment trump the First Amendment? If your First Amendment is legitimate, then why would you need to threaten us all, with a show of force? I'm sorry, I'm not scared at all. .. In fact, I'm just pissed at the threat. ..! ( and, I have a built in reason now, to discount your voice)

If these 20 or so, citizens will not stow their guns where they belong ~ then they have No Right to media. .. And, it would be a trespassing of our Airwaves as well; if we allow the "Wedge & Divide Networks" to sell us out.

That said, Fed's do your job and help your fellow Law Enforcement. .. And, let's hope these people do not hurt anyone. .. Or that these people would give the repressive demagogues any more ammo than they are already salivating ~ to have..

""All" ~ "Louie's, drop the guns..""
 
 
+30 # Cassandra2012 2016-01-10 18:16
The land is owned by the public ( that stole it from the 'Indians') but certainly not Bundy's to graze his cattle on for free (what were they always saying about 'free shit') ; They owe taxes for the use of PUBLIC (i.e., OUR ) LAND....
 
 
+1 # cmp 2016-01-11 05:24
Thanks C! .. and, I was being sarcastic. "Good Enough" was meant to imply gratitude.
.. But, it appears, that they would prefer to pay the banker. + taxes. .. (for some reason)

.. And, for some reason, the gov't doesn't seem worried that they will harm anyone, including media. Is this a Standard Operating Procedure for Standoffs with people who have guns?
... (didn't one of their associates already have "an incident" in Vegas? (??))
 
 
-71 # Floe 2016-01-10 14:20
Mark Ash, you're so short-sighted. Who to choose out of this filibuster? In a duel of supremacy, hope they eliminate each other. I am for anyone who goes against the government. Nobody else has done it. You've got to give them full marks for chutzpah. Unlike the coagulated "progressives" who look to government before they make a move of any kind. The myth of the "progressive" is what allows a black unknown to run a drone war while being showered with leis instead of revilement.
 
 
+23 # ericlipps 2016-01-10 14:54
Quoting Floe:
Mark Ash, you're so short-sighted. Who to choose out of this filibuster? In a duel of supremacy, hope they eliminate each other. I am for anyone who goes against the government. Nobody else has done it. You've got to give them full marks for chutzpah. Unlike the coagulated "progressives" who look to government before they make a move of any kind. The myth of the "progressive" is what allows a black unknown to run a drone war while being showered with leis instead of revilement.

So you'd support neo-Nazis or Communists?
 
 
+5 # economagic 2016-01-10 16:12
"I am for anyone who goes against the government."

In-bleepin'-deed. That is precisely the despairing attitude that gets us BOTH this kind of government AND this kind of opposition, and the history of such immature standoffs does not bode well.
 
 
+13 # bmiluski 2016-01-10 16:25
Wow Flo, congratulations . You've managed to get all the neo-con anti-Obama sound bites into one, somewhat, short post. Unlike your buddies babaregi, rmdc, etc.
 
 
+2 # lfeuille 2016-01-12 23:19
News Flash. Not all criticism of Obama comes from conservatives. Progressives have several issues with him. Prominent among them is his actual neocon foreign policy. Throwing the term at anyone who criticisms him for any reason makes you look foolish.
 
 
-7 # Depressionborn 2016-01-11 17:19
thanks Floe

inside each progressive libtard is an unhappy totalitarian
 
 
+23 # Radscal 2016-01-10 14:29
First, we must separate the original Hammond "arson" vs. "land use" issue from these "militiamen." The Hammonds accepted their (second) sentences and have told these "militiamen" to go away.

Here's an interesting exploration of the Oregon land use issues and specifically a history of the Hammonds v. BLM.

http://21stcenturywire.com/2016/01/04/federal-showdown-looms-in-oregon-over-blm-abuse-of-hammond-family-bundys-leading-protest/
 
 
+30 # Working Class 2016-01-10 16:15
Thanks for sending the link to the article. The author however makes an error right from the beginning. The repeal of the Hammond's first sentence by the government does not fit the definition of double jeopardy. Double Jeopardy is being tried twice for the same crime once you have been found not guilty. In this case a judge ignored the minimum mandatory sentence of five years and the government appealed that sentence successfully. I think the sentence for what they did is excessive, but the judge did not have legal authority to ignore the minimum sentence. As far as the Bundy group - they are also breaking the law and I hope they are held accountable. Their argument is to "return" the land to ranchers or local control. This land belongs to all US citizens and is management on our collective behalf by the BLM. I do not subscribe to giving it to a narrow interest group or local government organizations that would be influenced by such groups.
 
 
+19 # Ralph 2016-01-10 17:37
Should the land be granted to the states, it will be sold off to the 1% for profit. Then let's see what happens to these guys when they start grazing on corporate property.
 
 
+3 # Radscal 2016-01-10 18:30
I agree the second sentence seems excessively harsh. That first judge apparently thought that he could.... what's the word again???

Oh yeah, JUDGE. He thought he could judge the defendants. But that was before Clinton's Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996. All together Clinton signed 116 "mandatory minimum" orders that striped from judges their ability to judge sentences.

This article doesn't get into the Bundy Nevada situation. From what I've read it's a simple case of their refusing to pay the minuscule grazing rights fee BLM was charging them. And, as I wrote, the Hammonds rejected and distanced themselves from these "militiamen" anyway.

That's quite different than the apparent land-grab going on in Oregon. The Feds have already acquired more than 2.5 million acres of formerly private land and the Hammonds are the last hold outs there.

I did find a resource map of the area around the Hammond Ranch and Malhuer National Wildlife Refuge.

Turns out there's gold in them thar hills:

http://webharvest.gov/peth04/20041101185852/http:/www.or.blm.gov/Burns/Planning/AndrewsSteensRMP/AMS/AMS-Final/Fig2.17_locmin.gif
 
 
+18 # caylworth@gmail.com 2016-01-10 18:47
Quoting Working Class:
I think the sentence for what they did is excessive, but the judge did not have legal authority to ignore the minimum sentence.

I agree with you about the judge, but no one who has ever worked a wildfire would consider the sentence excessive.
 
 
-5 # Radscal 2016-01-10 22:52
The Hammonds put out the fire themselves. No firefighters were involved.
 
 
+1 # JJS 2016-01-13 18:58
"Live by the sword, die by the sword". Mandatory minimums for certain crimes (stupid IMHO) are the law of the land. Incidentally, man-mins were basically pushed BY REPUBLICANS to punish violations of the drug (marijuana) laws.
 
 
+38 # smilodon1 2016-01-10 14:44
The longer the government waits the greater the status of the Bundy misfits. Bundy the elder is still rising around giving the finger to us tax payers who are "giving" him free grazing on our lands. This needs to be treated like the insurrection it is and stopped by calling out the well regulated militia that is in Oregon, i. e., the Oregon National Guard.
 
 
+40 # DavidtheLiberal 2016-01-10 14:51
It is a terrible precedent, but let's see if you like this:
Seal those boys off, no one in, no one out, no supplies either, then cut off the electric service.
It won't be long before they come out and turn themselves in with no loss of our personnel. Right now that's the only thing worrying me.
 
 
-4 # Shades of gray matter 2016-01-10 15:07
Ah, in bloodlust the liberal chicken hawks are circling, demanding regime change at the Cowboy Caliphate. It would be tempting to send in Coalition Forces made up of Cleveland, NY, Chicago, Baltimore, and Ferguson kkkops. I think it is premature, and based on very little intelligence, so to speak, to DEMAND certain barn storming steps be taken Right Now, in this highly trumpeted Election fervor.
And, Butthead Bundy Corps IS racist to the core. Send in undercover agents waving Confederate Battle Flags & Holy Bibles. I doubt they have thorough vetting. With enough surveillance and penetration, catastrophe should be avoidable.
 
 
+10 # Charles3000 2016-01-10 15:11
The govt is on the right path. Ignore them. They will get nothing by holeing out in those buildings. Sooner or later they will get the message, they have accomplished nothing and gotten nothing and they will go home.
 
 
+9 # Shades of gray matter 2016-01-10 15:17
Loretta Lynch is AG to position her for SCOTUS. Thus, she cannot afford to appear anti-cop, although anti-Rahm might be ok. And, she cannot afford a Janet Reno redux, or sniper attacks on Sagebrush Shorties. Patience, preparation. The snack and publicity craving Gabby Galoots are making global fools of themselves, discrediting the Right, and drawing attention to Welfare Ranching. This might be a Sierra Club-Rachel Maddow false flag White Op, or a Homies on the Range Psy Op worthy of Mossad.
 
 
+17 # Vardoz 2016-01-10 15:21
Like someone said if they were black they would be dead already by our terrorist police force.
 
 
+26 # dipierro4 2016-01-10 15:44
Agreed. OTOH this does not mean the feds should be going in with overwhelming force. Two wrongs don't make a right, and one bad decision doesn't justify another.

On the other, other hand, it's not clear to me why they don't blockade reinforcements from entering.
 
 
+16 # Mtguide 2016-01-10 15:27
Could not agree more with this article. Absolutely spot on. Inaction is simply encouraging and emboldening this kind of lawlessness everywhere, and now you're already seeing evidence of that with the additional Patriots militia groups showing up. If the Fed. Govt. doesn't make some decisive and overwhelming response very soon, it will be too late to resolve this without real trouble.
 
 
+5 # goodsensecynic 2016-01-10 15:40
Am I the only one who thinks that the original post by "indian weaver" was meant in jest ... as satire, perhaps?

Or is it just that I'm the only one in this thread who isn't an American?
 
 
+3 # economagic 2016-01-10 16:21
Not quite -- see my reply near the top (a few minutes after your post). But sometimes people in these threads get off topic and/or jump to conclusions.
 
 
0 # Ralph 2016-01-10 17:51
The US has become a cesspool of xenophobia and racism. These guys are prima fascist evidence. Just because we have a black president doesn't change that reality and actually makes it more perverse and absurd that we can have a black leader turn on people of color like a rabid dog. In this context, the post makes perfect sense and would escape an outsider's point of view.
 
 
0 # JJS 2016-01-13 19:06
"prima fascist"- Ralph

Don't you mean "prima-facie" or are you being lyrical? I'm way too literal.
 
 
+4 # bardphile 2016-01-10 15:45
"The folly of that decision was obvious then and the result is all too clear now. The current situation in Oregon is the direct consequence of inaction at the Bundy Ranch."

Doesn't this sound familiar? It's the same sort of blame game that war hawks used after Vietnam, and are using now against Obama. We should have shot them, or bombed them, or bombed them more, or nuked them earlier, so now we REALLY have to shoot / bomb / nuke them or they'll take us over (or the dominos will fall, or civilization will end). As Radscal says, aren't we better than that? And no, if they were black they would not be dead. The Baltimore PD stood down when the looters took control of the streets, and the mayor took major heat in the conservative press, but at least bloodshed was averted. Yes, inaction can carry a price, and it isn't always the right policy. But there's always a price for the kind of vengeful, violent response the some are calling for.
 
 
+4 # economagic 2016-01-10 16:17
Very few people in this or similar threads are saying anything of the kind, rather, suggesting alternatives other than doing nothing at all or exercising the "nuclear option."
 
 
+9 # angryspittle 2016-01-10 16:00
Jesus Christ, Call out the fucking army and tell them to give up or else. This is treason, pure and simple.
 
 
+2 # Working Class 2016-01-10 16:22
This says it all:

http://www.trbimg.com/img-568c1fee/turbine/la-na-tt-george-washington-sagebrush-rebels-20-001/950/950x534
 
 
+5 # Robbee 2016-01-10 16:23
notes - # ericlipps 2016-01-10 14:52 "... Are you for real? A "white supremacist" federal government with a black president?"

- some folks here overwork their metaphors!
 
 
+9 # dotlady 2016-01-10 16:54
This sounds like another Grade-B movie like the life of El Chapo. Be better if we walked away and paid no attention. Let them get cold and hungry. This lot has won no points except to broadcast the old Sagebrush Rebellion cry in a new century. Its time is past. Why give them a media megaphone?
 
 
+2 # oakes721 2016-01-10 17:02
Some law enforcement authorities have been revealed in recent history to have been escalating and creating events rather than resolving them. Our aggressive foreign policies are likewise out of control, not unlike our leadership and all its wild-eyed contenders. Are these guys simply reflections of the great American frustration machine? Perhaps unable to manifest the real complaint, others fill in the blanks for themselves, regardless of the original argument.
.
Guns that fire bullets have a very limited range of influence. Have they come prepared with protection from various gases or other articles of warfare which might blanket the area? Among the new arrivals are undoubtedly some government people and winter's cold.
.
There have been calls to ridicule these people until they're laughed out of town. This will not diffuse anything but further isolate and infuriate. Respect for their courage is what they want, regardless of what the war was for. Self respect.
.
We all miss America
(as America would like to see itself).
 
 
+12 # Nominae 2016-01-10 20:37
Quoting oakes721:

There have been calls to ridicule these people until they're laughed out of town. This will not diffuse anything but further isolate and infuriate. Respect for their courage is what they want, regardless of what the war was for. Self respect.....


Excellent post right up until the *precise* point where you hilariously misidentify a bunch of low-self-esteem , testosterone-in secure, inarticulate, gun-waving *cowards* as actual human beings of courage.

"Self-respect" found at the end of a gun is a knee-slapping oxymoron.

A human being having both courage *and* self respect does NOT "act out" obvious male insecurities and a howling need for attention at the business end of a gun.

As they tell Marine recruits, "Respect is *Commanded* not *DEmanded*." One commands respect via one's own exemplary actions.
One can *never* successfully *DEMAND* something like respect.

And most *specifically* NOT as a result of waving guns in peoples' faces, clenching one's teeth, and stamping one's feet.

As one would say to a child (of more age-appropriate youth) "put down the guns, Honey, and try to learn how to use your *words* !"

Societies are not worthy of the name if everything is to be decided by the morons with the biggest guns, the "baddest" 4WDs, the most camping gear, and the warmest winter socks that their Mamas *did* remember to pack for them before they so "courageously" ran away from home - *literally* half-cocked.
 
 
+5 # Billy Bob 2016-01-10 21:32
Great post.
 
 
+1 # oakes721 2016-01-11 08:59
INARTICULATE is the key word: The WANT of self respect and not knowing how to go about achieving it is the problem. These same insults have been hurled at the US military as we are commanded to risk and take life without a full explanation why.
.
A corporate America has so twisted the laws and the meanings of words so as to make arguments against the corruption seem futile. My point is that this may only be a microcosm of the a greater problem.
 
 
-1 # Kulak 2016-01-10 17:07
Dotlady misses the point big time. Obama's cowardice in the face of these scofflaws just encourages them. Isn't that obvious?
And no one is talking about "bombing them or nuking them" as bardphile would have it.
It's a simple matter of enforcing the law.
What's next if these nuts get away with it? An armed (white, of course) gang occupying the White House and refusing to leave unless the president resigns?
 
 
+7 # economagic 2016-01-10 17:23
Some of us would say that an armed white gang has been running the country more or less since the Europeans landed on its shore. The fact that they found an African American willing to serve as front man only allows them to fool more of the people.

By the way I am white, male, old, and fat, but fairly well educated as things turned out (elitist yes, thanks to publicly-funded education), and still with a few functioning synapses for now.
 
 
+11 # Tom Thom 2016-01-10 17:11
These boys are harming no one but their own "cause" - and that even among many who sympathize. They have placed themselves under siege. Let's just wait them out and, when they lose focus and come out, meet them with Miranda and handcuffs. Charge them then with the minimum (demeaning) charge and send them home to their wives who will meet them with "what were you thinking"?
 
 
+7 # kando@ltidewater.net 2016-01-10 17:29
I agree with you Tom. Sometimes it is best not to dignify a stupid, self-important move by overreacting to it. The only possible gains these fellows could garner out of their "heroic" occupation of an unoccupied and unarmed federal site is (a) publicity making them look important and (b) being "victimized" by the big bad government. It is best to deny them both.Ignoring them and their immature behavior is probably the smartest federal strategy in this case.The will achieve nothing, except looking foolish.
 
 
+5 # Radscal 2016-01-10 18:47
Quoting Tom Thom:
These boys are harming no one but their own "cause" - and that even among many who sympathize. They have placed themselves under siege. Let's just wait them out and, when they lose focus and come out, meet them with Miranda and handcuffs. Charge them then with the minimum (demeaning) charge and send them home to their wives who will meet them with "what were you thinking"?


Exactly! I've waded into the "militia" web and find that the heads of "Oath Keepers" and the "3%" and others are all calling these guys idiot at best, or agents provocateurs.

They're warning folks to stay away. In fact, if you check out the youtube postings these guys put up calling for reinforcements, they're covered in comments warning people away.
 
 
+1 # Diane_Wilkinson_Trefethen_aka_tref 2016-01-11 16:51
Good plan Tom. The problem is that when the Feds do nothing, THEY REALLY DO NOTHING, including stopping new recruits, arms and supplies from coming in.

The US govt needs to keep out newcomers and blockade the supply lines. Duh...
 
 
+4 # Kulak 2016-01-10 17:19
What makes you think that their wives don't support them? You make the mistake that these are a normal, rational group of people, or at least their spouses are. Why would a normal, rational woman marry a simple-minded crackpot in the first place?
 
 
-11 # RNLDaWy 2016-01-10 17:20
You people make me laugh ... you climb up on your bloody pulpit whenever there is police force used and people die .. now when it's something you agree with .. you are just as fascist ..
 
 
+6 # Ralph 2016-01-10 17:38
You're obviously not reading the thread. Many readers are calling for treating this thing as the sham that it is.
 
 
-4 # RNLDaWy 2016-01-10 21:22
Don't care about the 'thread' or reacting to it .. this is to the author ..
 
 
-6 # RNLDaWy 2016-01-10 21:24
Except for a couple of scary white supremacy and Obama 'threaders' .. don't 'thread on them eh?' ... pretty fucking dumb folks ...
 
 
+8 # RMDC 2016-01-10 17:42
Why is there so much demand for a violent response from the police. I support ending this standoff peacefully, even if it takes a long time. That is mostly how the Occupy movement ended -- well, there were some pretty rough cops who pepper sprayed the hell out of people. But at least Occupy went on for months and the national guard did not start shooting as they have done in the past.

While the occupation goes on, the issues are debated in the press. The government is not always right. When it is wrong, it should give way.

I do not support the Bundy gun nuts at all. But I do support a police and government committed to peace and restrained by an inability to take human life.
 
 
+3 # kurt.cagle@gmail.com 2016-01-10 17:43
Oh, for crying out loud ...

These idiots WANT another Waco. They want to become martyrs against an "oppressive government" and fully expect that soon there will be thousands upon thousands of followers.

Instead, what's happening is that they are being treated as inconsequential , are becoming objects of derision (rightly) and are rapidly running out of basics like food and water. There's frankly nothing there to defend except some wildlife, and once these turkeys do finally surrender, they'll probably have them added to their tally of idiotic crimes.

Sieges usually are not completed successfully by storming the castle (or duck preserve in this case), they are successful because the defenders have no food or water left.

One final note - this IS a siege. The Feds have barricaded all the ways in or out, are patrolling the perimeter and likely are using non-lethal weapons. They will likely be there until enough people have defected and been captured, then will hit the place with sleeping gas or similar weapons.
 
 
-2 # Shades of gray matter 2016-01-10 18:16
For now, let them call public attention to Welfare Ranching. However, if there are copy cat Occupations, Obama will have to act. Drag Gabby Galoots over some cactus? "Oops. Sorry."
 
 
+2 # Promoting Peace 2016-01-10 18:23
It seems very clear that if nothing is done, it does embolden these and other crazies who would love to do the same thing. At the same time, having another Waco with dozens killed doesn't seem to be necessary.

And, to wait them out isn't fair to all the people this stand off negatively effects. Plus, most likely they aren't going to come out peacefully because their demands can't and won't be agreed upon.

So, why can't drones be used to break windows, shower down tear gas, and then if necessary shoot whoever comes out firing their assault rifles, but shoot them with tranquilizers?

Then, collect them up, prosecute them for their illegal actions, and put them in prison where they belong.
 
 
+4 # caylworth@gmail.com 2016-01-10 18:53
What's dumber than a Bundy Brother? The people who think they have a logical plan. These Cowboy Clowns are short on snacks, logic, and logistics.
 
 
+3 # futhark 2016-01-10 19:17
Looking at the well-bundled people in the picture, I just checked the Yahoo! weather site of Burns, Oregon. Aside from the political aspects of this confrontation, I consider it a Very Bad Idea in Oregon to be holding such a outdoors demonstration on a day when the high temperature is 26°F and the low is 13°F. Of course, if they hold out until tomorrow, they will be facing a high of 24°F and a low of 9°F. This may say something about their commitment to their convictions or their tenacity, or it might be indicative of their degree (PUN) of low intellectual capacity.
 
 
+3 # eyarden 2016-01-10 20:23
Noting the references to Waco and Ruby Ridge, it may be that the FBI has learned the importance of nonviolence when dealing with a particular lower caste, or social class. But we have not yet all of the evidence. But the proper disposal of federal lands mostly in states or cities, remains a big unanswered question. In most cities the disposition may be subject to local zoning. It is not the case that bureaucracies act independently of best interests of that bureaucracy. Qui bono? remains the question.
 
 
0 # JSRaleigh 2016-01-10 22:17
What would Abraham Lincoln have done?
 
 
+3 # dotlady 2016-01-11 00:34
Quoting Ayardin: "But the proper disposal of federal lands mostly in states or cities, remains a big unanswered question."
This is the heart of the matter. The ranchers have long used federal land for grazing and feel justified in doing so. Why should such federal lands be put in hands of states, which are historically more corruptible though payoffs - would that really improve the situation? I feel that the ranchers should pay reasonable leasing fees. It's different in the case of the Western Shoshone in Nevada, who inhabited the land before America was declared. Yet they have their cattle impounded, which is an injustice.
 
 
-3 # Depressionborn 2016-01-11 09:18
I seem to remember Lexington/Conco rde stands were illegal, but I am sure rsn greens would have favored the King's law.

Likely now militia are no longer workable, at least until it becomes really bad, (UN agendas and such). Since when should some states own land in another?
 
 
+7 # bmiluski 2016-01-11 09:46
There is no way in hell you can compare the American revolution to a bunch of welfare ranchers demanding land that belongs to ALL the people in this country.
 
 
-4 # Depressionborn 2016-01-11 15:24
Yes, a least not yet. But the ranch itself is theirs, has been for decades. They let a grass fire get on some rather small amount of fed range. BLM wants their ranch. They refused to sell.

Land that belongs to all belongs to none. You should knopw that.
 
 
0 # Cassandra2012 2016-01-28 12:19
[quote name="Depressionborn

Land that belongs to all belongs to none. You should knopw that.

Quite the contrary--

Federal PARKS & wildlife refuges belong to ALL of us!
 
 
+3 # RMolineaux 2016-01-11 12:30
My compliments to Marc for addressing the central issue in this matter. Government action to date has served only to provide a platform for the dissemination of criminal plans and activities in defiance of established law and authority. Federal jurisdiction should be obvious and immediate. The compound should be sealed off as the scene of a crime and the occupiers ordered to leave in the face of harsher penalties when arrested.
 
 
-3 # Nick Reynolds 2016-01-11 14:48
For what it's worth, Mr. Ash, and any who see things as he does, might read what the U.S. Representative from that district, Rep. Greg Walden, said about the situation on the floor of the House last Tuesday.
It's at http://republicbroadcasting.org/news/oregon-militants-walden-takes-blm-to-woodshed-transcript/

There are two sides to every issue. It seems to me that open-mindedness has never been a strong point for those calling themselves "progressive."
 
 
-6 # Depressionborn 2016-01-11 15:33
You can't educate most rsners.

In Minnesota there is a large northeast section of land called the Arrowhead. Not worth much except for cabins and fishing and recreational tourists. The feds offered to help out and make it a national park. They burned the cabins and decided anyone who used a fishing boat would be prosecuted for noise. It now is a fire hazard because they [feds] do not maintain anything and they need the money for more land.
 
 
+4 # Old4Poor 2016-01-11 15:03
Letting this go on is NOT defusing the situation, it is emboldening these idiots.
 
 
+5 # Rain17 2016-01-11 20:46
I'm sorry; but, if this were ANY other group, law enforcement would have cracked down on them by now.
 
 
-2 # Depressionborn 2016-01-12 02:57
Those who want a bigger government to solve the problem of too much government are like a bunch of little kids pouring gasoline on a fire.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN