This week I would like to share, with my fellow Observers, three separate incidents that occurred over the past 15 years that relate to each other..... sort of, although no one seems to want to admit it. I'll start the explanation of what I mean in Oregon in 2001 when ranchers Dwight and Steven Hammond set fire to leased federal land managed by the US Bureau of Land Management that burned 130 acres in an attempt to, what they claimed, "destroy an invasive species of plant" that was encroaching on their grazing lands. They asserted that they intended to control the fire but had "inadvertently set fire to public lands". It was then discovered by prosecutors through witness testimony that Steven Hammond was slaughtering deer illegally on the land with a group of associates. Hammond was reported to have "passed out stick matches" to the group members and instructed them to strike and drop them around the area they were in. Prosecutors alleged that the fire was set to destroy evidence of the crime. Reports also revealed that the father and son repeated the crime again in 2006. After convicting both and obtaining sentences for the ranchers, Dwight received 3 months and Steven 1 year, prosecutors immediately filed an appeal that claimed the sentences were not severe enough and won a resentencing hearing this past October that handed down 5 years to both offenders after they had served their initial sentences. Both Hammonds reported back to prison to serve the remainder of their sentences this past Monday.
Jump ahead to 2014 in Clark county, Nevada and another rancher named Cliven Bundy. In 1989 the Mojave Desert Tortoise was declared an endangered species and put an end to livestock grazing in that area. Cliven Bundy decided not to acknowledge the ban on grazing as the other ranchers did and for the next 25 years continued to raise his cattle there. Amassing a debt of over 1.1 million dollars in fees and fines with no intention of payment, federal agents seized a portion of the Bundy's cattle as compensation. An armed standoff with the Bundy's and members of the Oath Keepers, a known militia of past to present military, first responders and police officers, ensued when an attempt was made by agents to confiscate additional property of the ranchers. Not wanting to cause loss of life, the agents released the Bundy's cattle and left the property. As of this date, no resolution of the debt has been made and additional fees and fines continue to mount. On a side note, several members of the GOP supported Cliven in his defiance of the government. Donald Trump praised his "spirit, his spunk". Ted Cruz said it was a "reaction to the jackboot of authoritarianism". Rand Paul stated that it raised a "legitimate constitutional question" about federal overreach.
Ring in 2016 and bring in Ammon and Ryan Bundy (name sound familiar?) back in Burns, Oregon at a rally this past weekend protesting the Hammond's conviction in a peaceful demonstration with around 150 others.... until.... an armed group, led by the Bundy boys, calling themselves The Citizens For Constitutional Freedom, broke away from the protest and headed to the administrative buildings at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge and occupied the outpost. Holding press conferences outside at the edge of the refuge, the sons of Cliven Bundy informed the press they would occupy the refuge "for years" if necessary and be willing to "fight and die" to reclaim constitutionally protected rights for local land management. They also demanded the immediate release of Dwight and Steven Hammond.
The militia's takeover of the refuge occurred without violent incident since it was closed and unoccupied for the holiday weekend and no action by the government has been taken as of yet. The group has been requested to vacate the premises by the mayor of Burns, Oregon, the governor of Oregon, The US Fish and Wildlife Service and Harney county Sheriff Dave Ward stated "a collective effort from multiple agencies is currently working on a solution". The group claims that there are about 150 armed people at the refuge, but witnesses have only counted up to 15 individuals, a half a dozen vehicles and one trailer on the site. Ammon Bundy has stated that he and his group are "following direction from god" while his brother, Ryan, has claimed that "What we are doing is not rebellious. What we are doing is in accordance with the constitution, which is the supreme law of the land.". They chose the refuge to make a stand because they claim the refuge's creation was an unconstitutional act that removed local ranchers from the land, thrusting the county into an economic depression.
Yeah..... in 1908. That's right, my loyal reader, these jerks decided to pick a site to occupy, champion and defend because it was taken over and set aside as a migratory bird preserve and breeding ground by Theodore Roosevelt 108 years ago! Something's telling me that these bozos are just a little late in helping all those ranchers that were thrust into economic depression. I really don't think they're going to get much support for their cause from the local graveyards. As a matter of fact these spaghetti western rejects in their cowboy hats aren't getting much support from.... anyone. Despite all the media coverage, not too many Americans seem to be interested in what exactly is going on in Burns, Oregon and don't appear to want to be. The reason? Simply because they just don't care. And they're not alone. Not only did the Bundy's fail to get local support, being considered outsiders, they're fellow ranchers don't support them either. Such as Oregon's largest ranching group for instance. The Oregon Cattlemen Association president John O'Keefe stated "The OCA does not support illegal activity taken against the government. This includes militia takeover of government property, such as The Malheur Wildlife Refuge.". Although they claim to be under the "direction of god" The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, the religion that the Bundy's have belonged to for generations, spokesman Eric Hawkins released a statement citing "church leaders strongly condemn the armed seizure" and "are deeply troubled by the reports that they are doing so based on scriptural principles". Stewart Rhodes, founder of the Oath Keepers, who stood armed with the Bundy's two years ago stated "Bundy picked the wrong battle." claiming "We cannot force ourselves or our protection on people who don't want it.". The father and son ranchers that drew the attention of the anti-BLM group and were claimed to be one of the principle reasons the militia took over the outpost, the Hammonds, have told the AP, through their attorney and a written statement on the Oath Keeper's website, that "the Bundy's don't speak for us" and denounce the groups actions. Their own father Cliven stated last Saturday to Oregon Public Broadcasting "That's not exactly what I thought should happen.".
CNN reported last Tuesday that the GOP wants no part of the Oregon standoff or the ranchers whatsoever.... this time anyway. Maybe because this would be the second time they've dealt with this family and just can't bear the heartache of being caught with their face covered in a grazing rights cow pie again. You may remember republicans championing golden boy rancher Cliven Bundy as I stated earlier. Some of you may also remember a New York Times interview that made the GOP drop who they chose as an all American campaign face just as fast as recently party abandoned molester Josh Duggar and quickly forgotten gay bashing clerk Kim Davis when Bundy stated "I want to tell you one more thing about the Negro. They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail because they never learned to pick cotton." and "have often wondered, are they better off as slaves?".
Upon review, the ranchers don't support them, other militias don't support them, their church, the people they claim they did this for, their father and the conservatives don't either and despite all that, every time they go to town to get rations, the latest Garden & Gun issue and more bullets they drive through streets adorned with "GO HOME BUNDYS!" signs... and those are the polite ones. Talk about jumping on the bandwagon of a lost cause. Maybe the reason they are not being taken seriously is because most informed citizens understand that the BLM is a financial necessity for most western states. The federal government owns and maintains 81% 0f Nevada, 66% of Utah, 62% of Idaho and 53% of Oregon. For example, if the federal government turned land controlled by them over to Idaho it would could cost the state an average of 111 million dollars per year to maintain according to a University of Idaho research study. The land in question is utilized by parks and federal preserves that are enjoyed by all citizens, bring revenue to the local economies from tourism and cost nothing to the states taxpayers to maintain outside of what each of us pays in income taxes. Seems there's not a lot of thinking involved in understanding the upside in letting the feds keep it. I guess someone is going to have to explain this to the Bundy's and their cohorts.... along with the advanced complexity of addition and subtraction.... add a zero.... carry the one.... who can keep track? Makes their heads hurt.
The only people who do seem to care are the people criticizing the government because they believe no action has been taken by them against the militia because the protestors are white. Claiming that if they were Muslims or black, authorities would have acted more forceful. Although their criticism bears a faint hint of credence... and I do mean faint... I feel the more likely reason the federal government is dragging their feet is because of past standoff outcomes such as Ruby Ridge and Waco. I would also like to point out to these critics that both those incidents, which resulted in loss of life, one tremendously so, were caused by actions the federal government took against white opponents. That's the problem when critics play any race card. Although they accuse others of seeing only a particular color or religion, they themselves are color blind to any persecution other than what falls on theirs.
What should be a concern to all of us is that this group, organization, militia or whatever they call themselves feels justified in their actions even though the ones who should rally to their cause the most.... don't. That's what happens with most gun nuts and extremists.... Oh, excuse me.... enthusiasts and patriots. They feel invincible when they think they have the constitution and god on their side. They can't see past their own cause and justification no matter who tells them they're beating a dead horse... or in this case, cow. No matter who tells them that they're wrong. They also don't understand that the two things they think they have going for them are actually working against them. If you want to invoke the constitution and use it as a banner to fly for your cause, that's fine as paint by me. It's a tangible document that if interpreted incorrectly (and it all too often is) inevitably shows me and the general public just how high your reading on the idiot meter. As far as these clowns are concerned, I think it's maxed out. But why god? Why do these morons always believe that god is on their side? Why would god want to hijack a bird sanctuary in the middle of Nowhere, USA? Can't god watch any bird he wants anytime?.... Anywhere? I suppose it could be that god is the only one who cares about these nitwits. I know god loves everyone, but maybe he should cut these pinheads loose. After all, his son's church did.
The people who use their patriotism and religion to substantiate their cause are the most dangerous to society in their conduct. They truly believe they will be vindicated no matter how many people are against them. The more that we condemn their actions, the more steadfast they become in their conviction to continue to commit them. The best thing we can do sometimes, is to refrain from engaging them. Deprive them of the attention they so desperately want. Although there is a risk that ignoring them may precipitate a response from them to make us acknowledge their cause, more often than not, most will simply do what most headaches eventually do.... go away. Strictly an Observation. If you'll excuse me, I need some Ibuprofen.
View my other articles, posts and Like Strictly an Observer on Facebook
View all Strictly an Observer articles on Tumblr
Strictly an Observer is on Pinterest
Strictly an Observer is on My Space
Follow Strictly an Observer on Twitter
Follow Strictly an Observer on Google+
Contact Strictly an Observer. I welcome all correspondence.
