Audubon Society of Portland issues statement on Vanilla ISIS occupation of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge


#1

[Read the post]


#2

YallQaeda has stated that they are in for the “long haul” sans supplies, therefore we can stop all the hand wringing, they’ll be froze to death in a couple of weeks. And of course that will be another “Obama did it” from the Reich Wingers…


#3

Thanks, Obama!


#4

On the upside, birdwatchers have reported a notable increase in the local loon population.


#5

Dadgum bird huggers! That land is meant for two things only – cattle grazing and resource extraction. Oh, and for deer harvesting. And arson.


#6

Well I do hope the police intercept any supplies coming in. Shouldn’t pose a problem for true survivalists, eh?


#7

And, always, the shooting of any signage located within half a mile.


#8

Starting over…amongst the things that land is meant for are cattle grazing, resource extraction, deer harvesting, and arson.

Oh, and driving ATVs through the mud.


#9

The building they are occupying would not be that hard to rebuild after a well placed air strike but I’d hate to risk hurting the birds.


#10


#11

I think the government response reads as: Grumble grumble, i’m going to pout and complain that this is illegal. Boy, White Privilege in the US is a great thing isn’t it? If it was anyone else they would’ve gone in guns a blazing.


#12

Ignoring the morons until they run out of snacks or get bored does seem to be a better response than storming the place and creating another Waco or Ruby Ridge.

Just wish unarmed, non-white protesters could get the same treatment.


#14

“Citizens For Constitutional Freedom”?

If there were a legitimate beef with some law they felt was unconstitutional then they could litigate it all the way to the Supreme Court, and it would get settled there.

If holding a gift shop hostage was a viable way to change the law then once they were finished with their protest someone else could just hold another park office hostage and get the law changed back. “Constitutional Freedom” indeed, freedom to declare the Constitution is whatever you want it to be.


#15

Apparently they’ve “closed” the roads by simply refusing to plow them. What with anti-government armed gunmen occupying the place, there’s no reason to put government employees at risk of becoming hostages.


#16

I have my fingers crossed that someone in state will donate some unmarked high dose edibles. Let’s see how they handle Jacob’s Ladder. :scream:


#17

They said it wasn’t arson, it was a prescribed grassland burn.
Apparently there was some confusion as to the origin of these prescriptions…


#18

Someone mention needing a prescription for anything? How can I help?


#19

As this article points out, quoting a columnist in Reason magazine, sometimes the Supreme Court doesn’t care.

In rejecting Hogan’s conclusion that the mandatory minimum was unconstitutional as applied to the Hammonds, the 9th Circuit noted that the Supreme Court “has upheld far tougher sentences for less serious or, at the very least, comparable offenses.” The examples it cited included “a sentence of fifty years to life under California’s three-strikes law for stealing nine videotapes,” “a sentence of twenty-five years to life under California’s three-strikes law for the theft of three golf clubs,” “a forty-year sentence for possession of nine ounces of marijuana with the intent to distribute,” and “a life sentence under Texas’s recidivist statute for obtaining $120.75 by false pretenses.” If those penalties did not qualify as “grossly disproportionate,” the appeals court reasoned, five years for accidentally setting fire to federal land cannot possibly exceed the limits imposed by the Eighth Amendment.
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/01/oregon-mandatory-minimums/422433/

So even if the Hammond defense argument was true–it would not matter-- felons have been “fairly” sentenced to longer terms for less.

That said, the connection between the Hammond case, and the militia action is rather tenuous.

As for the rhetoric about it not being “terrorism”, in the eyes of some, ALF and ELF are terrorists, and those people wrote the law…


#20

Yes, I agree, mandatory minimums are ridiculous, including in the Hammond’s case.

If the guys occupying the building were doing so as a protest against mandatory minimums in general I might be more sympathetic, but their statements point to something larger and more conspiracy-minded. There is apparently a history of the Hammonds butting heads with the BLM just like the Bundys, and one of the guys there is Jon Ritzheimer, who has staged anti-Muslim rallies and threatened to put a Senator under citizen’s arrest for voting on the Iran nuclear agreement. The Hammond’s sentencing is only tangential to their real gripes here.


#21

Is that the asshole dude from Jingle All The Way? Well, everyone in that movie was an asshole, but the dude who worked in the toy store: http://i264.photobucket.com/albums/ii190/GQ_Customs/The%20RPF/JATWS2.jpg