No products in the cart.

News

In Burns with the Oath Keepers

By Shari Dovale, written February 7, 2016

 

A few weeks ago, I was asked by the Oath Keepers to go to Burns, Oregon. They needed another media crew there to help determine the feel of local residents concerning the occupation of the Malheur Wildlife Refuge.

I am an Oath Keeper and a journalist. I know there had been wildly alternating reports coming out of Burns, and I, like everyone else, wanted the true story. I was happy to go.

One of the first things I learned upon my arrival in Burns was that the Oath Keepers had had a presence there since before January 2016. Not attempting to make headlines, the Oath Keepers provided security when needed and contributed to mediation between varying groups.

Documenting events and advising when asked, the Oath Keepers made a difference in Burns. Hearing these stories made me prouder still to be a part of the organization.

Hammond Family
Hammond Family

The story really begins with Dwight Hammond. His difficulties with the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) date back decades. Without turning this into a detailed account of the history of the dispute, we will just say that the long-running battle with the BLM resulted in a conviction for Dwight and his son, Steven, in June 2012. The arson charges they were convicted of stemmed from a fire in 2001, and another in 2006.

The statute under which they were convicted and sentenced, the Federal Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, carries a minimum sentence of 5 years in prison, and a maximum sentence of death. When the Hammonds were originally sentenced, they argued that the five-year mandatory minimum terms were unconstitutional. Judge Michael Hogan agreed and imposed sentences well below what the law required.

On January 4, 2013 Dwight and Steven reported to prison. They fulfilled their sentences, Dwight 3 months and Steven 12 months. Dwight was released in March 2013 and Steven in January 2014.

About June of 2014, the prosecution filed appeals to re-sentence the men to the full minimum of 5 years each. This appeal was successful and the Hammonds reported back to prison on January 4, 2016.

On January 2, 2016, a rally was held in Burns to protest the return to prison for the Hammond men. Many saw this as a case of ‘Double Jeopardy’ and sour grapes by the federal government for not successfully bullying the Hammonds into turning over their ranch to the government.

It is still the belief of many that the ultimate goal of the BLM, and other federal agencies, is to force the Hammonds to turn over their lands, and the mineral rights, to the government.

The rally on January 2 was a peaceful rally. However, at the end of the day, a group led by Ammon Bundy, son of famed Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, secured the Malheur Wildlife Refuge and began an occupation of the property. Aided by many, including Arizona rancher Robert “LaVoy” Finicum, the group began to call themselves the Citizens for Constitutional Freedom (C4CF).

Though the protest began about the Hammonds, it soon morphed into a referendum against the BLM and other Federal agencies. The occupiers felt the need to educate the public about the vast overreach of the Federal government.

US Constitution, Article I, Sec. 8, Clause 17 states, The Congress shall have power: To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings.

This was their message, the United States Constitution. The belief that the Constitution was the supreme law of the land, and the belief that the Constitution was worth defending.

The C4CF continued to frequent businesses in Burns. Spending their money and supporting the town, they spoke with as many as would sit and talk to them.

There were not many residents in the beginning that were pleased with the take over of the refuge. Though most understood the basic message that Bundy’s group was sharing, they were unused to citizen action in this form. Civil disobedience was not a concept they were comfortable with.

Burns is a small town in a slightly populated county in rural eastern Oregon. The local government controls nearly all aspects of life. They employ a great amount of the residents. Judge Steve Grasty is the man that holds the strings throughout the area.

When the occupation began Judge Grasty reacted. He began by locking down the courthouse. He had barricades placed to surround the building, and armed guards patrolled the grounds. He forbade anyone to enter on what he considered ‘unnecessary’ business.

A resident told me they wished to go into the courthouse to research some documents for their property. They were forbidden. Normal, everyday business in the courthouse has come to a halt.

grasty
Judge Steve Grasty

The residents decided they needed to hear what Bundy had to say, so they could decide afterwards how they felt about it. They requested the use of a county building for this purpose. First, they requested the use of the main building at their fairgrounds. The request was denied by Judge Grasty. They requested the use of the Senior Center in town and this request was also denied by Grasty.

He made a public statement at a community meeting on January 19, 2016 saying that Bundy was promoting criminal activity, therefore any group that wanted him to speak would not be allowed access to a county facility.

This did not go over well with residents. Regardless of whether they agreed with Bundy’s message, they did not appreciate being censored by Grasty as to whether or not they should be free to assemble and hear whom they chose.

There were people that suggested a work around, “Just meet at someone’s home.” This may sound like a viable solution, yet it does not solve the issue of their right to Freely Assemble, as guaranteed by the Constitution.

burns rally
Burns Resident Rally. Photo Credit: Redoubt News

Many residents were livid. They saw it as a blatant disregard of their civil rights, including their right to free speech. This action by Judge Grasty lost him quite a lot of support that he previously enjoyed.

The scales were tipping in favor of the protesters.

Several residents held a rally on the streets of Burns. This rally was not about the Refuge. It was not about Bundy or his group. This rally was strictly for residents, by residents, about the civil rights they felt were being denied.

burns rally
Burns Resident Rally. Photo Credit: Redoubt News

Many of the protesters were still afraid to speak on camera. They cited retaliation by the local government, and Judge Grasty, against their families, as a very real fear.

But the town was still divided.

When the militia groups came to town, many seemed disruptive and troublesome. Several residents expressed their concerns that the militia groups wanted to “make the news” rather than help to resolve the current issues.

Various locals expressed to me their concerns that so many strangers had taken up residence in their town carrying weapons. They understood and appreciated the second amendment, yet seeing so many weapons arriving at one time felt very intimidating to them.

Many of the residents that I spoke with were friends with Steve Grasty and Sheriff David Ward. They felt the men were honorable and should not be vilified. “Good men sometimes have to make hard decisions,” one person said.

Yet, there were many people that believed the government would turn their town into a ghost town. That the residents would be herded into cities to live, and their small town way of life would cease.

One woman explained to me that ranching was the way of life in Harney County. Her husband used to work for the ranchers, but not anymore. The government has taken away many of the ranches, therefore, many of the jobs. Her family was barely hanging on with her custodial work.

She also did not think you could “fight City Hall.”

That seemed to be the major message that residents began discussing. If the government wanted something done a certain way, what could anyone do about it? They were used to a certain way of life, yet never thought about whether or not they, as individuals, could change the rules and make it better.

LaVoy Finicum
LaVoy Finicum. Photo Credit: Redoubt News

I had the pleasure of spending time with LaVoy Finicum during my time in Oregon. I visited the Refuge on multiple occasions. LaVoy was one of the first people I met and he made me feel safe, secure and very welcome.

LaVoy knew quite a lot about the Refuge and gave me a tour. He also showed me the artifacts referenced by the Burns-Paiute Tribe. I was grieved to see the poor treatment the artifacts had received over the past several decades.

LaVoy, and everyone at the refuge, showed every willingness to talk openly to me. Though I told them I would not discuss on camera any issue they felt uncomfortable with, they never once refused a subject. The transparency was a model the government would do well to emulate.

This openness, that all members appeared to share, was an important point to most residents. Several residents went to the Refuge to see for themselves what was happening. They were impressed with the improvements the group was making. The facilities had fallen into disrepair and cleanliness was an additional issue. The visitors that spoke to me all noted the changes.

Ammon Bundy
Ammon Bundy. Photo Credit: Redoubt News

The message that Bundy’s group was spreading was beginning to be heard further away. After about 3 weeks, the people of Grant County, just to the north of Burns, requested to meet with Ammon and his group. A townhall meeting was scheduled for the January 26, 2016 in the town of John Day.

Oregon’s US Senator Ron Wyden was quoted as saying the standoff was “a situation where the virus was spreading,” and action needed to be taken.

Several hundred people showed up for this townhall. Bundy’s group never arrived.

About 20 miles north of Burns, the FBI and the Oregon State Police set up a roadblock. They had snipers in the trees and dozens of Law Enforcement Officers on the scene. According to their statements, they were executing a routine “traffic stop.”

The traffic stop ended in the arrest of Ammon Bundy and several members of his group. It also resulted in the death of LaVoy Finicum, spokesman for the C4CF.

Finicum’s death shocked the community. Though most people expected something to happen, no one was willing to say they expected someone to die. Finicum was well liked and respected. It has hit many very hard.

Ammon Bundy was transferred to Portland. The militia mostly left Burns after several days. A few more rallies and the town was quiet.

But the pendulum is still moving. Many residents have found their voice. They do not want the momentum to end. They do not want things to return to the status quo. They are unhappy with their government, and still need guidance to resolve key issues. But they do not want a take-over of their town.

Burns is their home. It is where they chose to raise their children. It is where they want to spend their lives.

I have been asked by a few residents to return in a couple of weeks to see how they are doing. I am looking forward to it. And I am pretty sure that I am going to find Oath Keepers there when I arrive.

 

oath keepers

0

Stewart Rhodes

Stewart is the founder and National President of Oath Keepers. He served as a U.S. Army paratrooper until disabled in a rough terrain parachuting accident during a night jump. He is a former firearms instructor, former member of Rep. Ron Paul’s DC staff, and served as a volunteer firefighter in Montana. Stewart previously wrote the monthly Enemy at the Gates column for S.W.A.T. Magazine. Stewart graduated from Yale Law School in 2004, where his paper “Solving the Puzzle of Enemy Combatant Status” won Yale’s Miller prize for best paper on the Bill of Rights. He assisted teaching U.S. military history at Yale, was a Yale Research Scholar, and is writing a book on the dangers of applying the laws of war to the American people.


41 comments

  1. Even tho your reporter went out of her way to say you folks were still there, the truth of the matter is you cut and ran. Just another organization of gutless leadership or perhaps your families were threatened with death if you didn’t fold, as was Mr. Hammond’s.

    1. That is an odd name, for a puke like yourself. I trust you are still there, right? I highly doubt Steve Grasty and Sheriff David Ward have even begun to feel the kick back yet…. 🙂

    2. One question please — Why are you reading and commenting at this website, if that is what you think of Oath Keepers? Perhaps if you cut back on the green tea and fast-food, maybe you would judge yourself before you condemn others? Maybe Oath Keepers knows some obscured things you’re not aware of, isn’t that possible? What have you done lately? Have you made a stand anywhere, about anything? Just asking…

      Salute!
      Elias Alias, editor

      1. It is amazing how you cut others down when they don’t agree with you. I almost joined oathkeepers, but now i am glad I did not. you slip and slide around anything that makes you uncomfortable. Just because someone doesn’t drop everything to run to oregon to defend people who you yourself did not agree. I own the largest knife store in Arkansas, I support the 2nd amendment as much as anyone, but you must own up to the fact that you missed this one!

        1. To Buy Local:
          Wow. I am not sure if you were talking to me or to Faith. In case you were talking to me, I’ll seek some clarification from you please.

          Please show me where I cut somebody down for not agreeing with me. All I did was ask a question. When I personally do not like a website, I don’t go there, so I was curious why Faith was reading and posting here. Is that “cutting someone down”?

          In case you meant to reply to Faith, but ended up under my comment instead, then please just ignore this post, yes? Thanks.

          Salute!
          Elias Alias, editor

    3. Faith, your agenda is showing. Your comment is all unsubstantiated accusations and zero facts. A very good Oath Keeper friend of mine spent 16 days in Burns, Oregon working almost non-stop. She finally got home at 9 PM last night, exhausted after a long drive.

      Faith, what exactly were you doing the last 16 days to help your fellow citizens (besides complaining about what you mistakenly thought we weren’t doing)?

  2. I don’t know why you guys always misinterpret article one to mean the Feds get only ten square miles. It clearly states seat of government. If you read in context, they are obviously laying the legal ground work for DC. No nation of 300 hundred plus million could fit any kind of functional government on ten square miles in any case.

    Anyway, read article four, section three. Pretty clear the Feds can own land, and make laws about it. That is what any competent attorney would point you at.

    Finally US history would pretty much stove in the Feds can’t own land idea. US history would less interesting and far less important if Jefferson had not made the Louisiana Purchase. Feds gotta own land if we are going to expand. Interestingly, conservatives of time were against it. Fortunately, TJ, did not listen to them. If you absolutely feel the Feds cannot own big pieces of land, then you should start selling “Keep Iowa French” Tshirts.

    There is always a bunch of things to consider in public land use. I think engaging in the various ways the founding fathers left us will be much more useful than claiming legal overreaching when no legal experts or the general populace will agree with. It’s like the folks who claim income tax is illegal, despite the amendment. You just look crazy if you declare it void, based on an extremely unfounded and minority opinion.

    1. The fed gov can own territorial land. As in prior to statehood. Once a territory earns statehood then the equal footing thing comes into play and the land inside of the new states boundaries become property of the state. Now, the constitution does allow for the fed gov to own property inside the state boundaries in order to create forts armories and other NEEDFUL BUILDINGS. The Malheur refuge is not a needful building.

      I guess one could argue that the buildings on the refuge are needful though I doubt those buildings cover the entire refuge property.

      (Not an oath keeper, just a simple minded sympathizer with a keyboard )

    2. Ed! You would make an excellent incompetent judge, or incompetent lawyer! And you would have plenty of such in your company!

      Article 1, section 8 clause 17 as you read the first part does indeed state “To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States”, which is plenty of room for the LIMITED role of the federal government!

      You fail to read the rest “and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;”!

      By the consent of the state legislatures for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings (post offices, border facilities, things within the feds well defined box)! This defines what the feds can do within a state, and that is with the states permission! That is it! Everything the feds can do within a state! Everything else belongs to the states, and / or the people (the 10th Amendment)! Period!

      Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2 “The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.”

      Is all about territories! States are not territories! Territories are areas of land controlled by the U.S. before they become states! Once they become states, they are no longer territories, and all the land becomes part of the state! The federal government no longer controls it!

      The Louisiana purchase was territory before it became a state, and once it became a state, it was no longer territory! Do we say the territory of Louisiana today? No, we say the state of Louisiana! We do say the territory of Guam, which is a territory owned and controlled by the U.S. Do we say Guam is the 51 state? No, we do not!

      The Constitution is so well documented, and backed up by other supporting documentation that explains in detail what their intent was, that anyone taking it out of context does so via extreme ignorance, or with malice! Washington does so with extreme malice!

      1. Sorry, I forgot to mention all or part of: Alberta, and Saskatchewan, Canada, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, North, and South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, and Arkansas, which were also part of the Louisiana territory, and purchase.

    3. Ed, the federal government has control over territories until they become a state. Then the federal control ends unless a state gives permission to build stuff…and stuff only not “own” land. D.C. is the only land the federal government can actually own outright. Article IV, Section 3.–That’s the way I read it. You’re wrong. Nice try though. It’s quite obvious that the federal government has over-reached in many locations in our country both physically and morally like the EPA, BLM, Forestry, etc.

      The states have rights very similar to U.S. Citizens and shall not be infringed. That’s letter and the intent of the U.S. Constitution…the highest “law of the land”.

      May LaVoy rest in peace.

    4. “No nation of 300 hundred plus million could fit any kind of functional government on ten square miles in any case.”

      Ed- you obviously have a fundamental misunderstanding of exactly what the function of the federal government is supposed to be. What it is doing NOW is wholly beyond the bounds of its constitutionally delegated powers. Unless and until YOU can grasp what that means then anyone trying to convince you otherwise would be useless. I suggest you educate yourself on the facts instead of regurgitating what someone else told you to believe.

      A good start would be to actually read the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. If you did read them then you wouldn’t be stating ridiculously absurd things like, “No nation of 300 hundred plus million could fit any kind of functional government on ten square miles in any case.”

    5. #1. not sure who you’re talking to, but I never said anything about 10 square miles.
      #2. it is MY right and MY duty to read and study the Constitution for myself. What you are missing here, Talking Horse, is the Constitution. Yeah, the whole overriding theme and purpose. The Federal govt was not made to be a sort of dictator over the entire country. The Federal govt’s power reaches high, yes, but ONLY in the narrow boundaries / areas assigned to it.
      (#2a. do not lecture me about the Constitution or ‘reading it in context’ until you have: read and studied the Magna Carta, the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, the Anti-Federalist Papers, the Bill of Rights, as well as the transcripts of debates and the letters they wrote their friends and spouses and any other archived historical records relating to that era of American history as well as the specific function of actually building a nation. So stop it.)
      #3. I have found attorneys are clueless about the Constitution. They actually have little use for it. They make money by winning cases — not by truly KNOWING the Constitution Judges are often attorneys who failed lawyering, so I am even less impressed by many of our judges. (The most stunningly stupid people I have met have been 1- judges and 2- people with PhDs in “education”. Real estate agents are competing for #2.) I know I am right about this because almost NEVER will either group ever ACTUALLY defend the _Constitution_. All they are concerned about is 1-was my client victimized and 2-how much flesh can I extract from the other side? THAT pathetic construct is what the ‘practice of law’ in America has become. The Constitution has been discarded like a used contraceptive. Heck, THAT is WHY this country IS so SCREWED up!
      #4. Article 1, Sec 8 PLAINLY says the Feds can “have land” ONLY by 1- purchasing it from the State it belonged to, at the CONSENT of the State’s legislature and, 2- that land MUST be used for a SPECIFIC, legitimate (as in, Constitutionally-authorized) Federal -govt purpose. In other words, the Feds cannot just ‘own land’ just cuz they have money and they want to.
      #5. Art 4, Sec 3 is ALL ABOUT admitting NEW states into the legal union called the United States. When the Northwest Territory was acquired by the United States, that land did not automatically create a State. (States had to ‘form’ into a political entity and petition the US Congress to be ‘admitted’ into the US union as a State.) BUT the INTERNATIONAL boundary which the Federal govt was obligated to protect from foreign invasion was clearly expanded. It is that TERRITORY which the Federal govt maintained control over UNTIL that land became a State, at which time, the land fell under the ‘ownership and / or control’ of said STATE.
      #5a. ALSO and OF COURSE… any land that is ‘owned’ or ‘solely controlled’ by the Feds is subject to Federal regulation. BUT (to review this lesson) there are only TWO ways the Feds can “own” or “control” land: 1- they OWN it by outright purchasing it from a State AND that land had to be for a specific, legitimate function of the Federal govt. 2- they CONTROL land which falls within the international boundary of the USA… BUT that land is not yet formed into a Federally-recognized-and-admitted STATE.

      The Fed govt CANNOT Constitutionally show up in your life, inside the boundaries of a State, and declare “ownership” and/or control of ANY land. No matter how much the neophytes around us say so.

      US Military training bases are a legitimate function of the Federal govt — they have to have plenty of space for people training and weapon testing. Another example is – it wouldn’t be very cost effective (esp nowadays) – but the Feds could (legally / Constitutionally) buy land for the express purpose of the US Postal Service. That’s true ONLY because the US Postal Service is explicitly mentioned as a valid duty of the Federal govt. There are in fact, several valid duties (but not an ‘unlimited’ number or even a LOT OF duties) placed upon the Fed which would require some land …. for buildings, etc. BUT NO NOT EVER can the Feds just ” own/ buy land” or worse, like they are doing to the ranchers: just showing up and declaring “this is now ours”. FU Federal govt!! Get BACK into your LITTLE SQUARE. If you WANT to be a BULLY, get the Navy on the high seas and push OTHER NATIONS around… not your own CITIZENS !!! Fcking thugs. Hopefully LaVoy’s death will not be in vain.

    6. haha and wow… in the time I spent writing up my response, something like 4-5 ppl said essentially the same thing I did. ….Mr Ed got owned. Hope he takes it well. As Abraham Lincoln once said: “… we can also eliminate our enemies if we make them our friends” (responding to a question from a fragile-lady asking about the gruff words about ‘war’ and ‘eliminating our enemies’.) I admit, I get a little edgy when people tell ME I don’t know what I’m talking about as regarding the US Constitution. Been studying that thing since 2006… cuz I wanted to know …and I do not settle for the King’s priests to tell me what the Bible says….

    7. —Ed, It is clear that you were schooled in a federally-funded school system, aka, indoctrination centers. (as most of us were) —Mark Twain once said: ” I never let my formal schooling interfere with my education” —As no-one should —Those who do not seek truth, are at the mercy of liars….

  3. The truth is our militiamen patriots are doing the right thing. Burns Oregon is just one example of how screwed up the FEDS/FBI are. It’s no joke this country is failing and will soon fall. God bless America and our militiamen patriots.

  4. There is a Right Wing Anti-Communist Socialism, like that of President FDR administration and the early union leaders whom controlled the unions before 1976, which was still a free society that the citizens have liberty and right to own private property such as a home, business or land ownership. Were all people have political voice and strong governance policy making power power of their labor unions and by right to vote, all people of society were improving in social equality.

    Then we headed more towards Left Wing Socialism when all people have social equality, Political policy is decided on by a ruling counsel or congress. The majority of people begin to loose policy making decisions. The further to the political left, the citizens loose more of their freedom, liberty and individual rights.

    Even further left, they loose oppertunity to become able to afford to purchase private property and the right to gun ownership to protect and defend this property and self. That only becomes available to a smaller elite class, which are the origional Capitalists whom become an elite privileged class in the socialist society, whom become large investers thru hedge, private equity, corporate and union fund investments that eventually take over the governing role that will benefits their own interest.

    Extreme left Socialism of Fascism, when all private property is owned by a select few Elite in the ruling class and introduces a Dictatorship and militarized polIce force.

    Then Totalitarian Communism is Property Owned by the governing state under a high authority leader whom is the sole ruler over the whole Society under martial law.

    Where is American on this political measure and where is each other nation in the world? How far to the left will we have to progress before people will rise up and prevent further political progression to the left?

    Obama ruled by Executive Order bypassing the legislative branch while Americans saw a militarized police force present itself at the Ferguson protests. Individual home owners loose their homes in bankruptcy and small business owners become tenants in their business facilities.

    Private property has become hard to purchase by common citizens and commercial properties are becoming only owned by banks, Corporations and high profile investers investwd in Private investment and hedge funds. Corporations are taking over farmlands and government is hoarding on federal owned lands.

    What Socialism does Sanders support, Right or Left Wing? Does he live a lifestyle of the rich and famous or is it simular to that of a common middle class man?

    If his home is a mansion and he preaches socialism then he is a Communist in disguise, socialism is all about equality in social and economic status. BEWARE!!!

    Where is it that Trump wants to take us? He smears his opponents well but what is his plan to make America Great? Will he do for America what the Bolshevik Russian mafia Jew Joseph Stalin did to Communize Russia in the 1930’s?

    The people are in need to reestablish the Court of Commin Law trials that induct and judge by the citizens through a 25 member trial jury, established by the law of the land under Common Court System that already exists and is identified in the US Constitution!!!

    Leave your Constitution alone, indict government officials on violation of the 1940 Smith Act, which was to prevent supporters of foreign government from taking US Political System over for their own political agenda.

    Indict government officials on violating the 1954 Anti Communist Act established by Executive Order from President Dwight Eisenhower!!!

    1. What brought on the global stock market crash in 1929, was that the Central bankers had too much control over governments economic systems. The bankers and economists being majority Jews, Hitler and other nations including France Italy and the Arab muslim nations hated and chose to kill all jews.

      President Franklin D Rosevelt and other US political leaders put bank regulating controls on the Federal reserve and banks that stabilized bank industry for nearly 70 years until one such main stabilizing pillar of the financial market was changed in 1999, this being the Glass and Steagall Act. This policy seperated savings and loans from the securities and investment divisions.

      The removal on this division in the banking divisions, created a situation were trading of toxic assets taking down the finance sector that resulted in a meltdown. This brought on by the double increase on gasoline at the fuel pumps from $2.40 to approx $4 per gallon in Aug 2015.  Those prices remained at $4 until Feb 2015.

      This created a longer then usual economic slowdown that resulted in corporate bankruptcies and heavy home foreclosures in 2008-9, Foreclosures resulting from people exceeding the allowable time limits set on unemployment Insurance recipients that only lasts up to two years after all the extensions were exhausted.

      Besides that, unemployment insurance maximum limit was that what it was in the 1980’s, $360 per week, hardly enough for a single parent with a mortgage to feed and house that family along with all the other life sustaining necessities. 

      The system is set up to fail. Currently the economy is moving again, but no adjustments to economic or monetary policies have ever been changed to fix or correct the problems which can put America right back into a 2008-9 crisis against.

      Obama care, is a new law since 2012, which is even more cost burdening on individuals and the established 1949 traditional labor union pensions were terminated for future employees, when company bankruptcies occured, putting future union retiree 401k savings plans more in control of federal banker policies. 

      Company paid pension and healthcare for senior union employees helped prevented all those from loosing their houses in the past financial crisis, when it happens in the future, there is no longer those same safety nets.

      These problems need to be corrected or the result will be more catastrophic then it was in 2008 and global Communism is their end game!!!

    2. Having more people reliant and dependant on government social programs will make it easier for the Central Bankers policies to be effective when impose Communism on the nation and the world when they are ready to do so.

      They have done it once in Russia, then in China, Cuba and Venezuela. 
      Communism wont stop until it has the whole world under its control snd that wont happen until it can by ruled over by a global dictator which is only possible under Communism.

      One world government system, isnt it a great economic plan?

      The people dont own private property either in Communist nations, and in order to be free, you need to have affordable private property available to the common general public!!!

    3. With illegals coming across border into the US without border patrol resistance and Eric Holder fast and furious scandal, smuggling guns over to the Mexican cartels,  how long before those illegals start coming into America bringing those full auto weapons in with them on a planned attack?

      The more non-white socialist supporters in the US allows for their majority to over rule political policy over white land owner capitalists.

      That is the truth behind the implosion of the current illegals entering the US and European Christian nations.

      1. “With illegals coming across border into the US without border patrol resistance…”

        Actually under the US Constitution it IS the Militia of the several states that are to deal with invaders over our borders.

        Article 1, Section 8, Clause 15: “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel invasions.”

        Notice that it is the Militia that is constitutionally required to;
        — Enforce the US Constitution and each state’s Constitution,
        — Enforce and keep the “Laws of the Union” (which are constitutional laws ONLY),
        — Protect the country against all enemies both domestic and foreign, and
        — “to suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions”

        No one else or any other governmental agency.

    4. And now that Justice Scalia has died, what is to become of the second amendment? Would we as law abiding citizens be required to follow it? I have not eaten sense I heard of his death and now see that this may be the final nail in Americas coffin. So what does the conciseness have to say? I am really confused about this.When Obama puts another socialist in the SCOTUS is that it or what?

  5. Actually guys, article four states territory and property. Land is property. All the states in question agreed to federal ownership of the property in question. They already agreed to it. As a democracy, we can revisit the issue. However, you being angry does not void those agreements.

    You can write pages of rants. It changes nothing of history or law.

    1. “The congress shall have the Power to dispose of and make all needful rules respecting the Territory or other Property belong to the United States;…”

      You forgot that the property bought from the states (the way constitutionally laid out), and Washington DC is US (fed) property. It helps to have the complete wording of the section being quoted.

      Rather like Article 2, Section 2 is rarely ever quoted correctly, leaving out the most important part of *”… when called into the actual service of the United States.”

      *The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several states, when called into the actual Service of the United States;…”

      Which refers back to congress declaring war before a military can be brought into being with the Militia defending the USA while the military is taken from its already trained as required by congress of the military ranks.

    2. Don’t bother with the fools around here Ed. They just don’t care about reality. They want to live in their fictional world and throw out a simpleton’s view of Constitutional Law mostly founded in the racist and fantasy view of things of Sovereign/Posse Comitatus citizens. (Of course ironically they’ll even ignore the local’s and local Sheriff’s views if they cross their outside views).

  6. I’ll say this, I find that Burn’s attitude toward Ammon and Company is typical Torry attitude; much like they were in the Revolution. When I saw that video of Pete standing up and saying ” Whats being done to see that the Constitution is being followed” they booed him and then kicked him out. Regardless of how one feels about Pete that just made my blood boil. Then the videos of the protests, More form Burns came out against the militia and what it was trying to do. So no I don’t buy for one moment that the town gives a rats ass about anything. Stop trying to candy coat it saying were gaining ground. From Haney County’s own page i seen a letter from that POS, Grasty. Him and Ward are crooked as Crooked gets. the fear I think was overrated and knee jerked, plus sheepleated reaction by people who are Zombie like and haven’t had the brass for a long time.
    Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of Liberty. – Thomas Jefferson
    If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so. – Thomas Jefferson

  7. To add to John Smiths’ comment above… there is an article that John Loeffler wrote July 23, 2008 at newswithviews titled: “The Sad Road To Socialism”… it is easy to read, not too long, and it outlines the 3 sad steps to socialism…and the 3rd step is not where any country wants to go… it is written kinda humorously… I suggest you print it out and share it.. http://www.newswithviews.com/loeffler21.htm He begins with a quote from Bastiats: The Law, written in 1850…you see that referred to a lot… it is a short book, around 70 some odd pages..you can get it alongwith Smedley Butlers’ “War is a Racket” – not expensive at all_ go to: http://www.warisaracket.com (also today at newswithviews, attorney Lloyd Rees has a nice article pertaining to Viet Nam veterans..many good references.. http://www.newswithviews.com/Lloyd/rees167.htm

  8. “…residents would be herded into cities to live.” This is the most important quote of the article, and the point and motive behind all this tyranny. Tyrants like their ducks in barrels.

  9. All soldiers who have operated in a hearts and minds campaign understand one axiom. The locals understand one day you will not be around to protect them. The only way to disassemble the malaise of fear is to make sure they have an active network that can and will respond when they have troubles. Afghanistan is a perfect example of the hearts and mind campaign going sideways. The Taliban simply waits until the U.S. forces are gone and move back into the vacated area. The American Marxist is no different. Until a responsive presence is established they will continue to perform their foul deeds in the shadows. If on the other hand there is a responsive outfit that can be at any given situation to lend support as the injustice is occurring the light of day will force the cock roaches to retreat.
    Anonymity is the friend the Marxist depends on to force their will on others. Make them famous as they are abusing others and they will tread more lightly.
    By the way Shari Dovale created a wonderful piece here and her writing shows a true love for the topic.

    1. The Oregon Legislators rushed to create a Law, blocking the names of the wanderers of LaVoy. They were “afraid” that the Officers “might” receive death threats. But they seemed quite brave….shooting down an unarmed man. Oregon is steeped in corruption, from top to bottom.

  10. citizens of burns, here is how you start, get educated on the constitution yourself, speak with the other constitutional sheriffs in oregon… glen palmer, gil gilbertson, sheriff ward will have to face election and that is when you get a real sheriff who will stand up for you, then retire grasty, he does not get it ! kate brown will be up for re-election also… everone must get out & vote to defeat her. she is worse than kitzhopper & his concubine. if this condition continues to deteriorate these federal appointees in oregon will not be on your side, write letters & email washington to remove these rogue attorneys & judges.
    neo
    attacks on the constitution are like the self inflicted wounds of a mad man.

  11. Oath Keepers and 3%ers are the American Taliban. They roll in to own in pickup trucks dressed like mercenaries toting their AR-15’s and hard eying anyone who dares to look at them. The Idaho 3% set up a perimeter at the courthouse while Curtiss walked in and started making demands of Sheriff Ward. I can tell you right now that this infuriated the locals every bit as much as what happened to the Hammonds. I’d like to se Curtiss try this in his own AO (Ada County Idaho) and see how it works out for him.

    This incident really brought out the lunatic fringe of this movement. Ritzheimer and Cooper going in to town and harassing a woman that was wearing a BLM t-shirt… what real tough guys.

    Oath Keepers and 3% had better learn to choose their battles wisely because there’s a column forming in this country that has no use for .Fed or lunatic militia types and we are armed as well.

    1. dave are you a burns resident ? just curious… the lunatics i see here are the people who directed and participated in this bonnie & clyde style roadblock ambush & murder. conducted as it was away from the public eye is telling ! i feel senator ron wyden with his public comment ” THE VIRUS MUST NOT SPREAD ” is what put the nail in the coffin so to speak. if you are a burns resident you have my sympathies, it will be tough for a bit, hopefully all have learned something meaningful.

      neo

  12. Who were all those anonymous Oathkeepers in Burns? Why won’t one of them run for Sheriff?

    There’s still time to get a candidate for Sheriff or Judge (Grasty’s not running) or Commissioner.

    See https://oathkeepers.org/oregon/#comment-69858

    Richard Michael
    909-274-0813
    (I instigated the Republican Party 4th Congressional District “Standing for Your Rights” Convention in Roseburg in May 2015 in support of the Galice miners and property rights.)

  13. Thank you for going to Burns and reporting truth, I was wondering if anyone could tell me who all was engaged in the road block and death of Levoy, was it only FBI agents, or was the BLM also represented?
    Thank you again, Bill

Comments are closed.