Militias take over Eastern Oregon refuge building during protest, standoff

[space otter]

Constitution is all Our Rights to Live Under The lord as Free Men and Women not under Slavery of any Man's Power

does that not under any man's include  - not under bundy's idea ?
is this a case of my rights can stomp on your rights by one party taking over the property of the people by proclaiming that they are protecing two other parties who don't want to be protected?

bundy may have had a case for his own space and he and his group got massive support
but in my opinion this was a stupid move and not only did he loose credibility  - he lost the sympathy of the masses


oh yeah you might want to read that again as there is no mention of living under the lord anywhere in it  just that you can worship in any way you want..kinda different


ok I was wrong.. there is no mention of any gods or lords in there

but we are referencing the same place..how cool we agree on something

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription

......................................


sadly they are a joke

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bill-maher-oregon-militas_us_56a3fa35e4b0d8cc109a5e11





...........................................






...............................

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3vPttCwCZw&index=1&list=RDS3vPttCwCZw




............................








yeah I would sadly say lost credibility big time

[zorgon]

SILLY PAIUTES

ARE THEY NOW NOW AMERICANS?

So the Federal government is still stealling their lands


What is worse  Take a look at Mineral Collecting..

It has long been considered a RECREATIONAL LAND USE in keeping with the guidelines of the land management.

San Gabriel Mountains National Monument

Obama Administration has decided to make that area a National Monument. It has long been a popular collecting areas for families

You may want to read the following posts, given that the Obama administration changed the land status of the San Gabriel Mts, including the Cascade Canyon area.

http://www.mindat.org/forum.php?read,5,337390,340172

The difference between National Park and National Monument designation is largely in the manner in which it is designated in the political sphere, not how it is managed.

Management of both entities are by in large considered one and the same, so you can assume that any activities not permitted in a National Park, is equally not permitted in an area designated as a National Monument. As I understand it, Unlike National Parks, management of National Monuments may fall under any number of agencies including the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, so direct prohibition of recreational mineral collecting is likely to be an unstated prohibition. Mining activity is however a stated prohibition, so you can probably assume that recreational mineral collecting may likely fall into the same category, depending on which agency manages it and has it's say on the matter.

There may still be room for debate on permission for recreational mineral collecting in the areas not already designated as National Parks, but I wouldn't exactly hold my breath for a positive response to it.

Mark, correct me if I'm wrong, but this is the Los Angeles National Forest, which allows for prospecting. Cascade Canyon is technically in a water-shed and off limits to collecting as is, however, the mineralized deposit is quite expansive.

Yes, the San Gabriel Mountains will be off limits to mineral collecting of any kind. You better not be caught LOOKING at a rock funny.

This includes the Cascade Canyon Area near Mt. Baldy and the Actinolite Deposits of Wrightwood.

The Monument is not official until the maps defining the boundaries are established, which could be a couple years from now.

After it is a monument, you better not even be caught eating a blackberry off the bushes in Cascade Canyon, that will be illegal as well.

I tried posting this yesterday in a hurry at work, but I don't see it above so it must not have gone through.

National Forests and Grasslands on one hand and other "National" areas on the other are managed by two different federal agencies for two different purposes. Names of agencies and individual areas are confusingly similar, but the differences are important to recognize and understand.

National Forests and National Grasslands are under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), an agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. (Until the 1930s, National Monuments were also under USFS jurisdiction.) USFS's founding mandate is to manage lands under its jurisdiction "for the greatest good" of all Americans, which includes (at various places and at various times) resource extraction, recreation, fire suppression, and wilderness preservation. Managers of each USFS area develop their own land use policies, and those policies vary greatly from area to area. Permitted uses may or may not include recreational collecting, commercial specimen mining, or industrial mining.

National Parks, N. Monuments, N. Historic Sites, N. Memorials, N. Preserves, N. Battlefields, N. Scenic Riverways, etc. are under the jurisdiction of the U.S. National Park Service (NPS), an agency of the U.S. Department of the Interior. NPS's founding mandate is "to preserve and protect" resources under its care so as to keep them "unimpaired" for future generations. Collecting of natural or historical materials--plants (except dead-and-down firewood for camping), animals (except fish in certain cases), fossils, rocks, minerals, artifacts--is prohibited in all NPS areas unless specifically authorized for scientific purposes.

USFS and NPS often manage adjoining lands, and say what you will about dealing with either agency, it is remarkable that agencies of separate cabinet-level departments coexist as peacefully and constructively as they do when the nearest chain-of-command administrative link between a Forest Ranger on the USFS side of the fence and a Park Ranger on the NPS side is the President of the U.S.

BLM Collecting Guidelines
An objective of the BLM is to promote harmony and balance the use of Federal lands.
Respect all natural resources so that they can be enjoyed by others.

Federal regulation 43CFR8365 states that "reasonable quantities" of rock, minerals, gemstones, invertebrate and plant fossils of non-scientific importance can be collected for personnel use. "Reasonable quantity" is considered to be not more than what can be carried in a day pack. The BLM does not charge fees for collecting small, non-commercial quantities of rock taken by collectors. Collecting limited amounts of rocks, minerals, and gemstones is permitted on most federal lands, but there are some exceptions. Some lands are withdrawn or reserved for specific purposes such as outstanding natural areas, recreation sites, or national historic sites. Do not collect on prohibited or posted lands. Motorized vehicles and some other activities are prohibited on BLM lands that are designated as "Wilderness Regions". Signs are posted at roads and other accesses to these areas. There are no BLM rules for collecting in "Wilderness Regions". Collecting in these areas are up to the local district ranger. Check with them before collecting. Collecting in wilderness areas administered by the U.S. Forest Service is prohibited. Collectors are permitted to collect rocks from the surface of the ground and may use hand shovels or picks for digging. Diggings should not be more than four feet deep and should be filled before leaving. The use of explosives or power equipment is prohibited.

MINING CLAIMS
Collecting on recorded mining claims is not advised without the mining claimant's consent. The claimant has a legal right to minerals and gemstones on their claim. Collecting on claims can cause legal problems. Most claims are identified by posts or markers. It is illegal for a claimant to charge fees for collecting on their claim. Contact an area BLM office for any information on active and abandoned claim locations. Commonly collected rocks and minerals such as agate, jasper and petrified wood are not considered locatable under 1872 mining law. Common rocks and minerals are not subject to mining claims. Occasionally, some do stake claims for these materials. The fact that some material can be cut and polished does not give them a distinct or special value to make them locatable.

SALE OF ROCK
Commercial collection for the purpose of selling rocks is not allowed without special authorization. The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (Public Law 94-579) and other statutes provide that the United States government is to receive fair market value for the sale of common varieties of rock as well as for other resources which are sold or leased. Commercial quantities are sold at values established by appraisal and completion.

DECORATIVE ROCK
The collecting of rock for decorative purposes is permitted as long as it is a reasonable quantity. A reasonable quantity is considered to be the amount that can be carried in the trunk of a car.

PETRIFIED WOOD
Petrified wood may be taken for personal, non-commercial purposes and cannot be traded or sold to commercial dealers. In accordance with Federal Regulation 43 CFR 3662, the limit is 25 pounds plus one piece per day, or 250 pounds per year. No single piece greater than 250 pounds is permitted to be taken without a special permit. A material sale contract must be obtained from a BLM district office for collecting more than 250 pounds or for commercial use.

FOSSILS
It is illegal to collect vertebrate fossils on public lands without a paleontological permit. Vertebrate and other fossils of recognized scientific interest are protected under the Antiquities Act of 1906. In some cases, removing one of these fossils could create a gap in the scientific record. In accordance with 18 USC, Section 641, the taking of vertebrate fossils is theft of government property. Violators can be fined from $1000 to $10,000 and jailed from 1 to 10

[space otter]

don't mistake me for a gov luver..I was trying to point out that you need to pick your battles better and they screwed up royally with this stunt
if you want to play the game you gotta do it in a way that makes you look good not stupid and self serving.. that spot is already filled by  guess who

[zorgon]

Yeah they picked the wrong battle this time...

[space otter]

ok last word....also don't mistake me for a follower of anyone
especially Mormon millionaires  being pissy

[thorfourwinds]

[thorfourwinds]

[thorfourwinds]

Meet your local domestic terrorist.



Betcha Didn't Know: Blaine Cooper Plays Classical Piano! - #OregonFront - YouTube

[space otter]

I always like to pull back the curtain on stuff
this is a pasal of phonies


and i'll betcha you didn't know

http://thisainthell.us/blog/?p=61312
Jonn Lilyea | August 10, 2015 | 51 Comments

also same article with letters and such

http://www.fakewarriors.org/phonies/phonies781.htm



Blaine Cooper/Stanley Hicks; Oathkeeper strap hanger/fanboi

http://thisainthell.us/blog/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/Stanley-Hicks-265x300.jpg

The above picture of Stanley Blaine Hicks, they call him Blaine Cooper because that's what he goes by these days, is from a video where he calls for the arrest of John McCain for treason;
youtube removed
In a subsequent video that has now been removed from the internet, the interviewer calls Hicks/Cooper a Marine. Hicks/Cooper, however, says that he has never been a Marine    http://rtrnews.com/2014/05/28/senator-john-mccain-confronted-by-american-son-blaine-cooper/

Well, that's certainly true. But according to the Marine Corps he enlisted in the Delayed Entry Program, but then dropped off the face of the earth and never showed up for boot camp, which explains why he probably changed his name in January 2006.

Well, that and the fact that Stanley Hicks has 16 arrests and convictions in Arizona whereas Blaine Cooper only has one felony arrest and conviction in Arizona.

So, technically, he's not a phony, in that he was never a Marine and admits that fact, but these are the types that Oathkeepers lionize as heroes of their cause. I'm pretty sure that Stanley Blaine took an oath to show up for Marine Corps training and then disregarded that oath (to the Marine Corps' benefit, ultimately) so who the f*** is he to tell everyone else to honor their oaths?

Here's his comment on another blog post that triggered this investigation.

According to Stuart Rhodes, the ED of Oathkeepers, Hicks/Cooper is not a member of Oathkeepers, but he wears the T-shirts, and likes to hang out with them. So that was my mistake to say that he was a member of Oathkeepers – he's only gay for Oathkeepers.


............................


https://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2016/01/04/a-stupid-standoff-but-a-just-cause-my-thoughts-on-the-hammond-situation-in-oregon/


Ammon, apparently trying to recreate what cannot be recreated, is looking for another Bundy Ranch stand-off.  First, I would point out that such events can't be artificially fabricated.  They have to happen in an organic way.  Whenever a group of people attempt to engineer a revolutionary moment, even if their underlying motivations are righteous, it usually ends up kicking them in the ass (Fort Sumter is a good example).  Ammon's wingmen appear to be Blaine Cooper aka Stanley Blaine Hicks (a convicted felon), and Ryan Payne (who claimed falsely during the Bundy Ranch standoff that he was an Army Ranger and who worked diligently to cause divisions between involved parties on the ground).  This was the first sign that nothing good was going to come from the Hammond protest.

The plan is basically this – use the Hammond family as a vehicle (yes, this is what is being done) even though they did not want any kind of standoff to result and specifically refused aid.  Occupy federally owned buildings which have little to do with anything of importance and have no symbolic power as did Bundy Ranch.  Elicit federal response.  Wash, rinse, repeat.

Bundy Ranch had many positive elements going for it, which is why it ended the way it did.  This standoff has none of the same elements.

wasn't originally going to write anything about the armed occupation of a Federal outpost in Oregon by a group of opportunists creating an infantile and staged reaction to yet another egregious injustice of the U.S. criminal justice system. This is a very important distinction, because in today's world everyone feels the need to take an immediate and unyielding stance on every national story without appreciating the nuances involved. One can support the Hammonds, while at the same time denounce the tactics of Ammon Bundy.

Pretty much all of you have heard about the situation by now, but if you're like me, you probably haven't had the time to dig into the nitty gritty of the situation. For this, I turn to an excellent post at Patterico titled: What Are the Bundys Protesting? Here are a few excerpts:




.............................


http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-activists-oregon-20160105-story.html
Meet the cast of colorful characters in the Oregon standoff


.....................................


http://sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com/2014/05/stolen-valor-ryan-payne-exposed-as-fraud.html

Thursday, May 8, 2014

Stolen Valor: Ryan Payne Exposed as a Fraud.

A US Army Ranger Exposes Ryan Payne


Jim White, of Northwest Liberty News, interviewed Danny Harrington, a former Ranger, (Class of 8-85; 1st BN 83-88) who vetted Ryan Payne, who claims to have been a Ranger. Ryan Payne, if you recall, claims to be the head of security at the Bundy Ranch, and made several claims, on video, claiming he was a Ranger. Truth be told, Ryan Payne was not a Ranger, having never gone to Ranger School. Making false claims is not the way to be a trusted leader. Rangers don't like people who have never been Rangers claiming to have been one.

...........................


http://thisainthell.us/blog/?p=46564

[thorfourwinds]

As usual, you're right, Sweet Otter, and thank you for your patience.

Here is ex-ambassdor William Mount giving us the inside information.

BTW, this is an old friend of a certain robed figure that graces the halls of PRC.   lol





William Mount
Published on Jan 21, 2016
The attack on the Hammond Ranch is planned for no later than 2 February 2016. Then comes Martial Law, FEMA Camps Open as Red/Blue/Green lists are initiated.

[space otter]

bwhahahahahahahahaha

oh Thor.. I was willing to listen but when he mentioned astar command I turned it off 

why  give energy to a group two that can't be distinguished from group one? it's infighting not progress

big hugs to you brother..stay safe

[thorfourwinds]

I have yet to figure out what William Mount is about.   

[thorfourwinds]

Streamed live on Jan 22, 2016
Daily updates from Brandon Curtiss live on the ground in Burns, Oregon

[thorfourwinds]

The Next News Network
Published on Jan 21, 2016

A letter from the governor of Oregon, Katherine Brown, to the F B I director, James Comey, attorney general, Loretta Lynch, and President Barack Obama, was published Thursday by Oregon Public Broadcasting's John Sepulveda.

The letter details the Governor has reached her limit with the quote, "armed radicals" occupying the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. She also pleads with the F B I and Attorney General insisting for a quote, "swift resolution to the matter."

While the governor did not define, swift, she did confirm a large presence of state and federal agencies operating in the town of Burns, and indicated the town is under great stress due to the Bundy occupation.

Sepulveda details the Governor's misgivings with the lack of Federal action and disregard for the residents from a press conference in Salem where the governor stated quote, "The residents of Harney County have been overlooked and underserved by federal official's response thus far, I have conveyed these very grave concerns directly to our leaders at the highest levels of our government."

Katherine "Kate" Brown

At the press conference Governor Brown reiterated her insistence for a swift federal response stating quote, "Federal authorities must move quickly to end the occupation, and hold all of the wrong doers accountable, this spectacle of lawlessness must end."

If history is any indicator, of how the F B I may handle the swift response the Governor is insisting, one need look no further than the Federal government response at Waco.

After 51 days, that standoff swiftly concluded when the F B I initiated a tear gas attack and set fire to a building burning alive seventy six religious men, women, and children.

As of this report, the F B I has begun communication with Ammon Bundy through phone, however if the Governor gets her wish it could end in fire.

[thorfourwinds]