Topic: Oregon Standoff...

[H8PVMNT]

OK I have to start this up to have some discussion. 

I only know the story I see from the media on the laptop here. 

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/authorities-seal-off-oregon-refuge-after-leaders-of-occupation-arrested-1-killed-in-gunfire/ar-BBoKxtX?ocid=spartandhp

I know all kinds of farmers and mainly ranchers out here in MT that are drastically effected by federal land management policies.

Maybe these guys didn't go about things the right way but I thought they at least deserved some dialogue with policy makers or legislators in the process of their protest before the FBI started picking them off.  As far as I can see they are trying to make a statement about land management.  They way they are doing it is a bit extreme, but it's not like they are a religious cult with a death wish.  They don't have hostages and they aren't doing anyone physical harm. I really doubt from what we know of the old guy that got killed that anyone's life was in danger to the point of taking deadly force against him.

Then they arrest a radio host, I assume for talking and stirring things up?  So are we really there, where we can't make a statement about anything the federal government is doing without getting shot or arrested?

Am I missing anything here or off base? Is the way this is being handled wrong?

[David]

Just more government murder! Remember Ruby Ridge, killed his wife and son, murder, no better than the mafia.

[83 yoter]

I hate to say it but I think we've been there for several years. If they can get away with it of course their going to make people speaking out against them disappear. It's troubling to see this so close to home, makes you wonder who they'll go after next.

[David]

This video shows just how they shot him then did not even check to see if he was still alive. Murdering f**king cowards!!

[H8PVMNT [OP]]

I tried to watch the video with an open mind, putting myself in the position of the law enforcement fearing for their lives.  I had two uncles in OSP when I was growing up and enough police and state trooper buddies out here to understand the really bad positions they are in day to day.

Then I saw the date on the video:  Jan 27.  The guy was shot on on Jan 26!!


How are we supposed to even believe the video is legitimate with the wrong date on it?  I would love to hear an explanation of that.

What's even worse is the msn news/WP article now says it was on Wednesday the 27th.  You can search all over he place and confirm it happened on Tuesday the 26th. Big media changing headlines to back up lies, this is like something out of a bad conspiracy movie or an Orwell book.

[83 yoter]

I was just thinking that things from "1984" are becoming reality. Before you know it something similar to miniluv will be around...if something isnt't already.

[H8PVMNT [OP]]

Latest shot of the video in a Reuters article now has the Jan 27 date at the top left of the video cropped out.  This is unbelievable.

[84Flatbed]

I tried to watch the video with an open mind, putting myself in the position of the law enforcement fearing for their lives.  I had two uncles in OSP when I was growing up and enough police and state trooper buddies out here to understand the really bad positions they are in day to day.

Then I saw the date on the video:  Jan 27.  The guy was shot on on Jan 26!!


How are we supposed to even believe the video is legitimate with the wrong date on it?  I would love to hear an explanation of that.

What's even worse is the msn news/WP article now says it was on Wednesday the 27th.  You can search all over he place and confirm it happened on Tuesday the 26th. Big media changing headlines to back up lies, this is like something out of a bad conspiracy movie or an Orwell book.

The article you linked says the arrests and fatal shooting were on Tuesday. It talks about the press conference that took place the being the morning of Wed. 27th. The video wouldn't open for me, ill try again later.

[Cheesemaker]

I have read so much information from the beginning, and from all different angles.  And I have gathered my beliefs, on what is the most common thread in all of them.


Here is my take on it all. 

The Bundy's, thieving bastards, the feds walked away from a possible shitty situation in Nevada.  Snipers from both sides, and 24/7 video coverage.  But the Bundy's owed over $1 million for a signed contract for the BLM land they were using to graze their livestock on.  I'm sorry, a contract is a contract. 
Fed's could have handled the repossession of their livestock differently.  Now the Bundy's heads are too big!!

The Hammond's, from my understanding, yes the Gov did screw them.  BUT, they did some shady things themselves, and used fire to cover things up.  So both of them were right and wrong.  If the Hammond's did things on the up and up, and stayed clean, they could have gone to court, and could have won. They had Gov. documents going back almost 40 years, about plans the BLM was using to screw the Hammond's out of their land.  But the Hammond's got caught being stupid, and are paying the price.  Because, if they didn't do anything wrong, why did they voluntarily drive themselves to prison?

The whole Refuge take over, was a cluster F*CK from the beginning.  The Sheriff was the only clear headed person in the whole situation.  Everytime you saw anybody talking to reporters, it was a three ring circus.  Several people all talking to different stations, and they were not on the same page.  All in all, the Bundy's created a bigger problem than it should have been.  And nobody should have gotten hurt.  From the beginning the Feds really didn't want to get involved.  But our Bi-Sexual gun hating governor told the Feds to shut it down now!!  And they did.  Honestly, Finicum was willing to die for his beliefs.  And he proved it.  He tried to elude the agents, and he paid the price.  Suicide by cop.  All he had to do, was do what the agents asked him to do.  And did not do that. 




The best thing that should have happened over there, would have been to lock down the whole area.  Nobody in or out.  You want to talk to reporters, you go to a designated location.  Hell, they had people driving up to see what was going on.  People bringing food into them, and Idaho 3% showing up.  Lock down the whole area, and eventually they will come out, or they would go Donner party!!  That would have been the best way to control the situation. 


 

[Stocker]

Very well put, Cheesie. I have been following the story but not as thoroughly as you. Hats off to you for digging into it so deeply. As with virtually everything, there was a lot more to the situation than was aired, and a lot more than most of us will ever know. Thanks for posting!   

[H8PVMNT [OP]]

The article you linked says the arrests and fatal shooting were on Tuesday. It talks about the press conference that took place the being the morning of Wed. 27th. The video wouldn't open for me, ill try again later.

You are correct, they did say the 26th.  The video had Jan 27 on it, which regardless of point of view is alarming.

Here is a link that might work...

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/as-standoff-in-oregon-continues-fbi-releases-video-of-occupiers-death/

[H8PVMNT [OP]]

I really appreciate the input from the Oregon guys.  You guys are the closest to getting the strait story on this thing.

I don't think these guys went about their protest the right way and I don't think the old dude had to be shot.  I was not there, however so it's certainly not fair to think I can be the judge of right and wrong of a very tense situation.  The officers there may very well have been in danger.

One of our close friends (state trooper) was nearly killed when his fellow officer was ran over by a dude all messed up on bath salts last year.  It would have been fine and totally justified for one of them to shoot that guy.  Somebody further from the situation would probably have a different view though.

I am all for standing up if you think something isn't right.  I don't have a problem with anybody carrying guns.  In the current political and social climate I think an armed takeover like that will not be considered credible as a form of protest. It kind of feeds the fire and has the opposite effect the protestors are looking for as everybody can instantly lump them in with terrorists and every text book religious extremists over the past 25 years.

I do think that guy should have paid his grazing lease fees.  A contract is, indeed a contract.  I also don't think it's the intent of the constitution for the federal government to own so much real estate.

This is an example of "Those that live by the sword, die by the sword".  If they hadn't been armed to the teeth and made such a big deal out of being armed I don't think anyone would have been shot and they still would have made a statement.

I think if the western rancher types really want to be effective to make policy change they should take jobs with the BLM or run for office.  There are a lot more ways to change things than even the "proper channels".  If you want to change policy, get involved with making it.  Tired of all the red tape?  Take a government job and apply a little common sense to it. Treat people like people instead of files.  In my experience, all the "red tape" amounts to is people not willing to make decisions and take responsibility for their action in their particular job.

I was an independant appraiser for about a decade and always disgusted with how it seems like none of the lenders or even government agencies ever wanted an honest appraisal.  It wasn't always the case, but a lot of times you really felt the pressure to come in at whatever their magic number was.  When the state appraiser job came up I saw a place I could make a difference doing honest work so I took it. My work is directly related to peoples' property taxes. Now I can make a goofy, computerized mass appraisal system tell the truth when most of the people in my position are willing to make the machinery do all the thinking for them. When you just let it do it's own thing, I would say about a third of the tax payers are not getting an honest appraisal.

I'm not trying to pat myself on the back here, I'm just offering this as an example of how to make change without having a shootout or going to jail.  I could have probably just went and staged a hostile takeover of the local revenue office, but I would be in jail and the values would still be all screwed up.

[H8PVMNT [OP]]

Very well put, Cheesie. I have been following the story but not as thoroughly as you. Hats off to you for digging into it so deeply. As with virtually everything, there was a lot more to the situation than was aired, and a lot more than most of us will ever know. Thanks for posting!   

This brings up an interesting point.  If you have a protest in the middle of nowhere there is very little accountability for all parties involved because nobody was there to see what really went down.

[Stocker]

I don't think these guys went about their protest the right way and I don't think the old dude had to be shot.  I was not there, however so it's certainly not fair to think I can be the judge of right and wrong of a very tense situation.  The officers there may very well have been in danger.

I watched the video several times. It's poor quality (a good case for body cams) so it's hard to tell exactly what happened, but here's my takeaway: Mr. Finicum drove around the roadblock and got stuck in the snow. When he exited the truck, his hands were up but he seemed to reach twice towards his coat pocket, where a loaded semi-auto was. The law does not need to see a weapon if they believe one is there and is about to be used against them. The cops did what Mr. Finicum forced them to do. Suicide by cop? I don't know, but he was clearly on record stating he would rather die than be locked up.

I am all for standing up if you think something isn't right.  I don't have a problem with anybody carrying guns.  In the current political and social climate I think an armed takeover like that will not be considered credible as a form of protest. It kind of feeds the fire and has the opposite effect the protestors are looking for as everybody can instantly lump them in with terrorists and every text book religious extremists over the past 25 years.

I do think that guy should have paid his grazing lease fees.  A contract is, indeed a contract.  I also don't think it's the intent of the constitution for the federal government to own so much real estate.

This is an example of "Those that live by the sword, die by the sword".  If they hadn't been armed to the teeth and made such a big deal out of being armed I don't think anyone would have been shot and they still would have made a statement.

Agreed on all points. Well said.

I think if the western rancher types really want to be effective to make policy change they should take jobs with the BLM or run for office.  There are a lot more ways to change things than even the "proper channels".  If you want to change policy, get involved with making it.  Tired of all the red tape?  Take a government job and apply a little common sense to it. Treat people like people instead of files.  In my experience, all the "red tape" amounts to is people not willing to make decisions and take responsibility for their action in their particular job.

Again, good points and this is something I have said for years. Working the system from the inside is very effective, more than any protest. Unfortunately the left-wing libs figured this out a long time ago and that's why so much of our government is so screwed up now. They got themselves elected in large enough numbers that they now have a lot to say about how things are run. Maybe the pendulum will begin to swing back the other direction, but only if enough common-sense people get involved.