No products in the cart.

News

Oregon III% Press Release on Malheur Wildlife Refuge

Oregon III Percent

3% of Oregon Official Press Release

Topic: Malheur Wildlife Refuge Siege

On January 2, 2016, various patriot organizations under the direction of the Oregon 3% and associated groups organized a peaceful rally in Burns, Oregon in a show of support for the Hammonds Family and the community of Harney County. The immediate aims of this peaceful protest were to voice dissent of the wrongful prosecution of the Hammonds, the family’s subsequent decision to report to prison for federal charges, and for the refusal of the Sherriff to protect and support the citizens of Harney County. Following the peaceful protest, members of militias and individuals voiced their decision to “take a hard stand” which would be to seize a Federal National Wildlife Refuge building in Malheur County, and succeeded in doing so.

Unbeknownst to the Idaho 3%, Oregon 3%, it’s leaders, associations, rally participants, or the citizens of Harney County; these actions were premeditated and carried out by a small group of persons who chose to carry out this takeover after the rally. The 3% of Idaho, 3% of Oregon, The Oregon Constitutional Guard, and PPN organizations in no way condone nor support these actions. They do not mirror our vision, mission statement, or views in regards to upholding the Constitution, The Rule of Law, or Due Process.
During the weeks leading up to the rally, none of the aforementioned groups made any Calls to Arms to it’s members, nor planned or advocated for any form of armed uprising. The citizens of Harney County remain in solidarity with the aforementioned groups, as well as support our efforts to remain peaceful in our attempt to exercise the 1st Amendment Right. For the time being, we will remain in Harney County to continue to show our support for the Hammonds, and the community. We will continue to release updates and information as it is available. We want to personally thank the citizens of Harney County and the city of Burns for their hospitality.

Oregon iii%

0

Shorty Dawkins

Oath Keepers Merchandise

9 comments

  1. Starting to think this is an operation to smear the militia. Take a look at the characters calling the shots over there. Smells of proactive psyop contigency plan to make militias look bad publicly while executive gun control being enacted. Something stinks worse than fake tears.

    1. I agree. A liar who goes by the name Ryan Payne posed as a Ranger at the Bundy ranch. Stewart Rhodes of OK’s vetted Payne and discovered that he had never attended Ranger school. Payne was impersonating a Ranger.

      I am proud to be an OK and I also respect the 3%s. I’m sticking with them.

  2. One of the problems is that some of these groups are calling themselves the “militia.” And these militia’s are not what is written in the first part of the 2nd Amendment. READ Edwin Vieira’s research on what is called “The Constitutional Militia” by starting with this article: http://edwinvieira.com/edwin274.htm

  3. Didn’t have time to read your link but Cindy is at least partially correct. The “well regulated militia”, aka, “Regulars” … the States surrendered away to the Feds for access to Fed money (after the 16th Amend was passed) and the ‘official’, State-sanctioned militia became the Fed controlled (and largely equipped and funded) Nat’l Guard. But there are still the ‘irregular mililtia’ which has the right to form, train, do whatever it wants in the direction of support of the Constitution and the rule of law. The 2nd half of the 2nd.Amend is just an affirmation that the first half is not to be construed in any way that the People can ever legally have their rights to be armed, infringed ( one doesn’t have to be in a militia, etc.) . Pretty radical stuff, really (but govt corruption is much worse). But without it, this republic would have been long gone already. The Peoples’ right to be armed is actually derived from their right to private property: if you have no force or means to protect or preserve it, you don’t really have it. So actually, the individual right to bear arms comes from the private-property basis of our republic. The well regulated statement is all about political power against govt, just like all the other Bill of Rights are all about. It’s all about putting things in their proper, documented context. The ENTIRE Bill of Rights is ALL ABOUT power against the govt… It would be silly to say that is true and then say the 2nd is actually all about hunting or hobbies. Very silly indeed. I have read that the States insisted there be a Bill of Rights for the People and the States before the States would fully ratify the new Constitution v2.0. ‘power to the people even if the people are dumb as rocks’, God help us all!! But that is the USA in a nutshell. I don’t know if we will survive our leaders and their ‘useful idiots’….

  4. Great explanation, thank you,
    The juristiction of the blm is clearly an ultimate force. Especially when the allies come in; such as various fbi and military response teams, who have profile info. networks at their disposal, cell phone data info, wifi info, satilite & air recon, plus a heavy influence on the news spin. The blm is just one layer of the onion, and when protests happen directed at the blm, you get a cross-section view of the onion. but that onion is also a pyramid, with the absolute power resting at the top, nowhere near the incident or the danger. The real threat to the top of the pyramid is in the supreme court. Maybe the house, senate, and supreme court need to brush up on the (original) constitution before they pick up their pens and sign something that causes a constitutional conundrum.

Comments are closed.