Oregon Standoff

Jane_the_Bane · Jan 11, 2016

I'd invite everyone to compare the "Oregon Standoff" to the Wounded Knee incident of 1973.

See if you can spot differences.

One Voice Among Many1 · Jan 11, 2016

smaneck said:
It rightfully belongs to the Northern Paiute Tribe who have worked out an arrangement with the federal government allowing them to use the land according to their traditional practices. Without giving up their rightful claim they appear to be satisfied with the federal government's stewardship over the refuge. It does not and never did belong to ranchers, miners or loggers. As the tribal chief pointed out, these ranchers did not come over on the Bering Strait, that they can claim this land.

A'ho. I agree with the tribal chief, except we part ways on the B.S. theory, but that is another discussion for another time. And this thread should not be derailed debating that theory either. These white men are only Wasichus stealing from other Wasichus. One thief stealing from another. And yes, I mean Wasichu as greedy and thieves.

smaneck · Jan 11, 2016

One Voice Among Many said:
A'ho. I agree with the tribal chief, except we part ways on the B.S. theory, but that is another discussion for another time. And this thread should not be derailed debating that theory either.

I was wondering if you'd notice that.

One Voice Among Many1 · Jan 11, 2016

Jane_the_Bane said:
I'd invite everyone to compare the "Oregon Standoff" to the Wounded Knee incident of 1973.

See if you can spot differences.

A'ho. There was a military presence at Wounded Knee 1973.

One Voice Among Many1 · Jan 11, 2016

Zoness said:
Which is why I'm surprised the natives haven't tried something similar, especially since it started as their land. They probably knew that if they tried it, the military would have incinerated them by now.

Occupation of Alcatraz Island 1969 and the Siege at Wounded Knee 1973. Research these events and note the difference between how the US government responded to A.I.M. protesting injustice and oppression of NDNs compared to the government response to these white men in Oregon protesting paying taxes and grazing fees.

One Voice Among Many1 · Jan 11, 2016

JackRT said:
Treaties signed by the tribes with the USA have a long history of breakage.

"They made us many promises, more than I can remember, but they never kept but one; they promised to take our land, and they took it." - Chief Red Cloud

One Voice Among Many1 · Jan 11, 2016

smaneck said:
Really?

No kidding.

smaneck · Jan 11, 2016

One Voice Among Many said:
Occupation of Alcatraz Island 1969 and the Siege at Wounded Knee 1973. Research these events and note the difference between how the US government responded to A.I.M. protesting injustice and oppression of NDNs compared to the government response to these white men in Oregon protesting paying taxes and grazing fees.

And sending people to jail for arson.

tadoflamb · Jan 11, 2016

smaneck said:
It seems most of the participants in the Oregon standoff are Mormons. Now I'm not suggesting that the Mormon Church is responsible for its wingnuts, but the Church does have a lot of power and authority in relationship to its membership. I would think it would be helpful at this point if the Church were to send in one of their Bishops or higher-ups there to mediate a solution. Perhaps tell them to stand-down on pain of excommunication?

I think the federal government should throw up a blockade and shut off the electricity. I've had enough freeloading from these guys.

Ironhold · Jan 11, 2016

A National Review writer tried to play "devil's advocate" in order to see if there was anything that could justify the standoff.

In the process of doing so, they discovered that the BLM officials in the region actually do have a history of aggressive activity towards those farmers and ranchers whose land they want, including an incident in which they diverted water away from a number of private properties until the lack of water killed all potential for economic activity.

Between this and the way the Hammond family were railroaded at court, the writer came to the conclusion that there is actual anger behind everything, and that at least some of this anger may actually be justified.

smaneck · Jan 11, 2016

tadoflamb said:
I think the federal government should throw up a blockade and shut off the electricity. I've had enough freeloading from these guys.

smaneck · Jan 11, 2016

Ironhold said:
Between this and the way the Hammond family were railroaded at court, the writer came to the conclusion that there is actual anger behind everything, and that at least some of this anger may actually be justified.

The Hammond Family was not railroaded. The evidence against them was based on the testimony of members of the Hammonds own family. The 2001 fire was set right after Steven Hammond had illegally shot several deer on Refuge land. In other words, he was poaching and the purpose of the fire was to cover up the evidence of poaching. It was Dwight Hammond's own grandson and Steven's nephew who testified to this fact. This boy was given a box of matches and told to light fires everywhere. At one point he separated from the rest and surrounded by fire. He survived only by jumping into a creek. The second fire started in 2006 was done during a 'burn ban' put in place because firefighters were busy elsewhere fighting another forest fire in the area.

So why did this judge feel the teenager's testimony was biased? Because Steve Hammond had a history of abusing that boy which caused him to have bouts of depression. During one of these bouts the boy mutilated himself by using a paper clip to carve his initials into his chest. Steven Hammond's response was to torture the boy by sandpapering the initials off. And by the way, the Hammond family does not deny this. Here is the evidence of the child abuse:

http://cdn.thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/04135010/DH-testimony.pdf

In my opinion they should have got five years just for that!

smaneck · Jan 12, 2016

What I think was 'over the top' was charging the Hammonds with terrorism. The only one who was terrorized was that boy, and no charges were ever filed with the family for that, even though the evidence of abuse was overwhelming and never even denied by the Hammond family. In fact Steven's response was to tell the police he'd like to make sure the boy wished he'd never been born for reporting the abuse. I note the National Review accuses the prosecutor of 'hunting down' this boy. I doubt very much if that is the way it happened. I think he finally wanted to speak out against the family that had abused him so badly for years. But I do think the prosecutor's background in child advocacy probably had something to do with why she was really out to get this family. And I really don't like that article depicting Dusty Hammond as mentally ill and somehow incompetent to testify against them. I see no evidence that he suffered anything more serious than depression and probably PTSD given what they did to him.

smaneck · Jan 22, 2016

Apparently there are a couple of brothers who have initiated a 'go home' campaign against the gunmen in Oregon who took over the refuge. They are urging people to pledge to donate a certain amount per day of the occupation. The donations will go to charities our gunmen may not approve of. Friends of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, the Burns Paiute Reservation, a gun control lobby and the Southern Poverty Law Center. So far they've raised over 60K.
http://www.gohomemalheur.org/

I think it is a rather clever idea.

Corpus Aristotelicum · Jan 22, 2016

smaneck said:
It seems most of the participants in the Oregon standoff are Mormons. Now I'm not suggesting that the Mormon Church is responsible for its wingnuts, but the Church does have a lot of power and authority in relationship to its membership. I would think it would be helpful at this point if the Church were to send in one of their Bishops or higher-ups there to mediate a solution. Perhaps tell them to stand-down on pain of excommunication?

I was not aware that 'Most' or even any were Mormon. The news only seems to report a person's faith if they are Muslim or suspected to be Muslim....

How many are Mormon? Percentage of total?

smaneck · Jan 22, 2016

Since we don't know what the total is that is rather hard to determine, but the Bundy family is Mormon. And one of these guys goes by the appellation Captain Moroni who appears as a Nephite military commander in the Book of Mormon. Also, notice their references to having received some kind of revelation from God to do what they are doing. It is a rather formulaic Mormon approach. Here is a good article on it:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...ing-the-book-of-mormons-military-stud-muffin/

Chesterton · Jan 22, 2016

smaneck said:
...the gunmen...
...our gunmen...

Hilarious.

smaneck said:
Since we don't know what the total is that is rather hard to determine, but the Bundy family is Mormon. And one of these guys goes by the appellation Captain Moroni who appears as a Nephite military commander in the Book of Mormon. Also, notice their references to having received some kind of revelation from God to do what they are doing. It is a rather formulaic Mormon approach. Here is a good article on it:

Hilarious-er. I'll copy this for future pasting, it'll save a bit of time. I can just replace Moroni with Muhammad and Mormon with Islam.

smaneck · Jan 22, 2016

Chesterton said:
Hilarious.

Hilarious-er. I'll copy this for future pasting, it'll save a bit of time. I can just replace Moroni with Muhammad and Mormon with Islam.

You insist on presenting this as an attack on the LDS. It is not and never has been. All I did was point up the connections between these guys and the Mormon Church and suggest the LDS could help persuade them to leave. Unfortunately, unlike the Mormons, Muslims have no central authority who could step in and tell their whackos to knock it off.

Chesterton · Jan 22, 2016

smaneck said:
You insist on presenting this as an attack on the LDS. It is not and never has been. All I did was point up the connections between these guys and the Mormon Church and suggest the LDS could help persuade them to leave. Unfortunately, unlike the Mormons, Muslims have no central authority who could step in and tell their whackos to knock it off.

All I do is point out connections too, and I'm accused of being bigoted and hateful. And yes, I very much wish they did have a central authority. Or maybe I don't, depending on what the authority would say. I know what my authority says, I know what your House of Justice says. I'd be apprehensive about what a Muslim final authority would actually say because it would probably depend on who had the better army.

smaneck · Jan 22, 2016

Chesterton said:
All I do is point out connections too, and I'm accused of being bigoted and hateful.

No, you do more than that. You want to blame it on Islam, Muhammad and the Qur'an itself something I pointedly did not do.

Oregon Standoff

Gaia's godchild

Well-Known Member

Baha'i

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Baha'i

no identificado

Member

Baha'i

Baha'i

Baha'i

Baha'i

Active Member

Baha'i

Whats So Funny bout Peace Love and Understanding

Baha'i

Whats So Funny bout Peace Love and Understanding

Baha'i

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency