Federal Policing Of Public Lands Targeted By Western Lawmakers
A bill introduced in Congress would “terminate” the law enforcement powers of the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management. Those agencies manage millions of acres across much of the West. A group of Republicans in Congress believe they have the solution to the ongoing showdowns over public land in the West: end the federal government’s enforcement responsibilities.
Law enforcement on public land is a hotly-contested issue in the West — particularly after armed conflicts in Oregon and Nevada — but tensions run deeper than the two standoffs. In recent interviews with BuzzFeed News, local officials have described what they call “out of control” federal agencies, and pointed to raids in 2009 during which armed agents with the Bureau of Land Management arrested people for allegedly trafficking in Native American antiquities.
A bill introduced in the House of Representatives last week by Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah would and hand enforcement on these lands over to local authorities and “terminate the law enforcement functions of the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management.”
Chaffetz said his bill would prevent future conflicts by putting local agencies — local sheriffs, in many cases — in charge of federal lands.
“When you have a locally elected sheriff, I think you get ultimately a better more peaceful result,” he told BuzzFeed News.
In many of these conflicts, participants have seen law enforcement agents — such as those singled out for elimination in Chaffetz’s bill — as the tip of the federal government’s spear.
Federal Policing Of Public Lands Targeted By Western Lawmakers
A bill introduced in Congress would “terminate” the law enforcement powers of the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management. Those agencies manage millions of acres across much of the West. A group of Republicans in Congress believe they have the solution to the ongoing showdowns over public land in the West: end the federal government’s enforcement responsibilities.
Law enforcement on public land is a hotly-contested issue in the West — particularly after armed conflicts in Oregon and Nevada — but tensions run deeper than the two standoffs. In recent interviews with BuzzFeed News, local officials have described what they call “out of control” federal agencies, and pointed to raids in 2009 during which armed agents with the Bureau of Land Management arrested people for allegedly trafficking in Native American antiquities.
A bill introduced in the House of Representatives last week by Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah would and hand enforcement on these lands over to local authorities and “terminate the law enforcement functions of the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management.”
Chaffetz said his bill would prevent future conflicts by putting local agencies — local sheriffs, in many cases — in charge of federal lands.
“When you have a locally elected sheriff, I think you get ultimately a better more peaceful result,” he told BuzzFeed News.
In many of these conflicts, participants have seen law enforcement agents — such as those singled out for elimination in Chaffetz’s bill — as the tip of the federal government’s spear.
“When you have a locally elected sheriff, I think you get ultimately a better more peaceful result,” he told BuzzFeed News.
Yeah, because they are so much more objective when it comes to local vs federal law and order issues right?
If I knew all mysteries and all knowledge, and have not charity, I am nothing. St. Paul I hang onto my prejudices, they are the testicles of my mind. Eric Hoffer
As the recovery begins, Karges said he's determined to prove the protesters wrong in their claim that the federal government is an oppressive landlord. Karges worked years with others to hammer out a 15-year plan for the future of the refuge, put into play three years ago.
A photo from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service shows the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge after the armed occupation in January and February. ~ Fish and Wildlife Service/Flickr
In January and February, armed anti-federalists took over a wildlife refuge in Oregon for 41 days.
They said they were protesting in support of two Oregon ranchers sentenced to prison for arson. During the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, one man was killed by police; since the militants surrendered, 25 people have been charged with crimes related to the occupation, Oregon Public Media reports.
After the occupation ended on Feb. 11, FBI investigators examined the scene before handing it back to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on Feb. 23.
The Fish and Wildlife Service has now released photos of the scene that awaited them when they returned to the federal property. You can view the full album here.
(It's a shame they apparently never finished reading that deep conspiracy book, Lauren Ipsum to its end. photo 1 of 7 of those displayed in the article ~ Iam)
The images show personal property and trash strewn across the refuge building, liquor bottles tucked into a disarranged sofa and a large dent in a refuge wall.
The unkempt appearance of the property was presaged by a conversation two of the occupiers had with a supporter on the final day of the occupation.
Gavin Seim — an activist who live-streamed his conversations with the militants during the final days of the occupation — at one point prompted them to describe how well they had cared for the property. The answer, from husband and wife Sean and Sandy Anderson, wasn't quite what he was expecting:
Gavin Seim: "Just to be clear, since we've got you on here, 'cause you know, we know that they're going to try to spin this their way — That refuge is in better shape and cleaner and better maintained than before the patriots showed up there, isn't it?"
Sean Anderson: "Um. There's a little bit of mess because people just left in such a hurry, because they were afraid. But we actually spent some time down there and tried to clean that up and do what we could to, you know, wipe things down and mop and sweep."
Sandy Anderson: "It was left in major disarray when everybody panicked and left."
Seim: "Right, but overall, there was a lot of work and care given to the place."
Sandy Anderson: "Exactly. But — but — but that's changed now, because no one was here to maintain it and no one got the chance to clean up when they left. They just, they grabbed what they needed and got out and left everything sitting the way it was, and we had to move our camp up here, because we did not want to be in the building."
Seim: "So it's important then to note that any mess that the government comes in and portrays is because of their terrorizing of the people and scaring them out of there and trying to intimidate them."
You can hear that conversation here. (Note: Elsewhere this video contains expletives).
One occupier has also been accused of stealing cameras and other equipment from the refuge, the Blue Mountain Eagle reports, and the Paiute tribe has denounced the occupiers for desecrating sacred land. (The Andersons told Seim that the occupiers did not damage any artifacts.)
This week, reporters were allowed back onto the refuge for the first time since the end of the occupation.
John Sepulvado of NPR member station Oregon Public Broadcasting was there. He reported for OPB: "The refuge, which was blanketed in snow during the 41-day occupation, shows signs of spring's arrival: birds twitter and chirp and cattle graze in the distance. On the surface, life seems to be moving on. However, there are numerous costs in returning the refuge back to normal."
The cost of the occupation as a whole, Sepulvado says, includes a price tag of $5.7 million and counting, an enormous backlog of unfinished work on environmental projects, and psychological toll on workers and the community.
"Despite everything, there seems to be considerable progress being made at restoring the refuge to its pre-occupation condition," Sepulvado reported. "A spokesperson for the Fish and Wildlife Service expects it to be fully open within the next four weeks."
OPB covered the full story of the occupation in an hour-long audio documentary, 41 Days.
The list is current as of March 25, 2016. The people on the list represent a range of viewpoints on the occupation and the federal government. They include both leaders of the occupation and sympathizers: like the rancher from Baker County who brought his family down so his 9-year-old daughter could see the event for herself. Or a Burns resident who said he met with the leaders at the refuge to make a more informed assessment of what was happening.
New indictments filed as recently as March 22 have brought the number of people charged in the occupation to 27. Prosecutors have not indicated whether they will name more defendants.
What we know about people at the refuge (statistics include only the adults):
-- Home state:Visitors came from 24 states. Oregon had the largest representation, with 30 people (28 percent). Idaho followed with 13 people (12 percent), then Nevada, Washington, Arizona and California. People came from as far away as New Hampshire and Florida.
-- Indicted: Most of the 27 protesters indicted so far are from outside Oregon. Oregon and Nevada both have four charged occupiers (15 percent). Arizona, Idaho and Utah are in a three-way tie for second place at three each (12 percent).
-- Women: 25 (23 percent)
--Average Age: 44
-- Employment: Among them were several ranchers, some retirees, a barber, a lawyer, a marketing director, a nurse, a property manager, a roofer, a truck driver and a tree worker.
-- Felons: At least seven have felony convictions, from murder to taking a vehicle without permission. One of the arrested, Jason Patrick, has a pending felony charge of making terrorist threats in Georgia.
-- Financial problems: 31 (29 percent) had a past bankruptcy, lien or judgment.
-- Military: At least 16 identified themselves as having served in the U.S. military. Ryan Payne and some of the others cited their military experience as one of the reasons they became involved in anti-government protests.
PHOTOS: The Mess Occupiers Left At Malheur National Wildlife Refuge
Yeah, how much of that is how it looked, after the Authority apparatus, moved in to clear the place, looking for any and all reasons to add charges. I've seen scenes after police, etc leave and I promise you, they don't give a fuck. They will ransack like a bunch of hungry feral animals and not worry one wit about how the place looks afterwards.
I rate this -3 on the propagenda ratings scale.
“The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe we are doing it.”
I don't know, Grizzly. The second photo clearly is taken in an area construction is or was underway, so some or all of it could be floor sweepings. But this wasn't someone's home that could be ransacked without fear of repercussion, but the government's own property and it was swarming with all sorts of government LE. They are not short on supply of potential charges, so I doubt they need to manufacture evidence by wrecking the place.
Nope, wrong Grizzly...they were streaming their own vids showing it in that same messy condition....they dug a trench to shit in because they didn't want to stay inside the buildings any more...entitled stupid Mormon-cultist sov-cit shitheads...It ain't a mystery...
Posted this before, but here are some 600 pages looking in-depth at these fuckwads:
PHOTOS: The Mess Occupiers Left At Malheur National Wildlife Refuge
Yeah, how much of that is how it looked, after the Authority apparatus, moved in to clear the place, looking for any and all reasons to add charges. I've seen scenes after police, etc leave and I promise you, they don't give a fuck. They will ransack like a bunch of hungry feral animals and not worry one wit about how the place looks afterwards.
I rate this -3 on the propagenda ratings scale.
Definitely. It appears that the distaste of the militia faction here has blinded some to the corruption and foul play by the FBI and other government agencies involved with this fiasco. The same FBI and government agencies that get thoroughly questioned in other threads around here have clean hands here? Not likely.
Federal Policing Of Public Lands Targeted By Western Lawmakers
A bill introduced in Congress would “terminate” the law enforcement powers of the U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management. Those agencies manage millions of acres across much of the West. A group of Republicans in Congress believe they have the solution to the ongoing showdowns over public land in the West: end the federal government’s enforcement responsibilities.
Law enforcement on public land is a hotly-contested issue in the West — particularly after armed conflicts in Oregon and Nevada — but tensions run deeper than the two standoffs. In recent interviews with BuzzFeed News, local officials have described what they call “out of control” federal agencies, and pointed to raids in 2009 during which armed agents with the Bureau of Land Management arrested people for allegedly trafficking in Native American antiquities.
A bill introduced in the House of Representatives last week by Rep. Jason Chaffetz of Utah would and hand enforcement on these lands over to local authorities and “terminate the law enforcement functions of the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management.”
Chaffetz said his bill would prevent future conflicts by putting local agencies — local sheriffs, in many cases — in charge of federal lands.
“When you have a locally elected sheriff, I think you get ultimately a better more peaceful result,” he told BuzzFeed News.
In many of these conflicts, participants have seen law enforcement agents — such as those singled out for elimination in Chaffetz’s bill — as the tip of the federal government’s spear.
“When you have a locally elected sheriff, I think you get ultimately a better more peaceful result,” he told BuzzFeed News.
Yeah, because they are so much more objective when it comes to local vs federal law and order issues right?
No, lol, but local rule/jurisdiction speaks loudly to these groups.
Chaffetz himself is a bit of a chimera, A former Jewish Democrat that is now a Mormon Conservative. I disagree with prob 90% of his platform, find the other 10% intriguing at least.
Exactly. What really did they expect? With or without a corrupt government you are going to expect something like that to come to you -- to reiterate what I have said upthread numerous times. They got off easy. Nothing to be pissed about for their part in this.
There is no me. There is no you. There is all. There is no you. There is no me. And that is all. A profound acceptance of an enormous pageantry. A haunting certainty that the unifying principle of this universe is love. -- Propagandhi
Wasn't necessarily referring to only 'the militia" at Malheur when I referred to "these groups(plural)". And of course even this militia was responsive to a local Sheriff that was receptive to them. In fact that's who Finnicum claimed they were on their way to see, which would support the idea that they prefer local rule over federal. Their anti-fed convictions are obvious. Chaffetz-Mossad? where does that come from? Not me. And don't worry 82, I am not pissed about the fate of anyone involved in this story!
82_28 » Tue Mar 29, 2016 3:12 pm wrote:Exactly. What really did they expect? With or without a corrupt government you are going to expect something like that to come to you -- to reiterate what I have said upthread numerous times. They got off easy. Nothing to be pissed about for their part in this.
Though I don't know who got off easy? A bunch are in jail- soon to be in prison, one is dead, and it is claimed that everyone that participated in the occupation in any way are soon to be charged.. maybe got off easy in the sense that they weren't all ruby ridged.
Oregon standoff defendants found not guilty in 'unbelievable, truly astonishing' verdict
A jury Thursday delivered a stunning across-the-board acquittal to the leaders and participants in the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge occupation and a remarkable blow to the federal government as it tries to tamp down a national movement led by a Nevada family to open public lands to ranchers, miners and loggers.
The verdicts finding Ammon Bundy, older brother Ryan Bundy and five others not guilty of a federal conspiracy drew elation from defense attorneys who spent five weeks arguing that the armed takeover amounted to a time-honored tradition of First Amendment protest and civil disobedience.
How is this possible? How can a group of armed men take over a federal building for a month and suffer no legal repercussions? Well, here's one juror's take on it.
Juror 4: Prosecutors in Oregon standoff case failed to prove defendants' 'intent' to impede federal workers
Juror 4 noted the panel couldn't simply rely on the defendants' "defining actions'' to convict.
"All 12 agreed that impeding existed, even if as an effect of the occupation,'' he wrote.
"But we were not asked to judge on bullets and hurt feelings, rather to decide if any agreement was made with an illegal object in mind,'' the Marylhurst student wrote. "It seemed this basic, high standard of proof was lost upon the prosecution throughout.''
How is this possible? How can a group of armed men take over a federal building for a month and suffer no legal repercussions?
Because that's just what we saw on TV.
What happened was a group of Federal informants -- and, let's be frank, outright, undercover FBI -- set up a honeypot operation to regain full spectrum dominance over a militia movement that had begun to evolve out of their control months earlier with the Bundy standoff.
The propaganda / realism value of having these assets in prison was easily outweighed by the value of giving them a victory to rally around and putting them back onto the game reserve. Militias are a perfect threat: not remotely serious as a challenge to US authority, but more than dangerous enough to make headlines whenever you need them to. Farm-grown extremism.
^^ That's an angle I hadn't thought about. So Bundy and company get released back into the wild to stir the hornet's nest again, and the feds keep an eye on them all the while.
You know, if Trump wins the election it will probably put a damper on the militia movement. After all, it nearly died out after Oklahoma, but saw an exponential resurgence after Obama was elected. If Hillary wins, however, I expect the militia train to keep on rolling.
