Reports of "Militia Takeover" in Oregon

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, looks like these Bozos' arrogance finally caught up with them. Pretty foolish to think that they'd be able to continue to travel unimpeded indefinitely. They're criminals. As Michaelcj noted, Feds waited for the opportunity to apprehend the ring leaders on an isolated stretch of road with minimal risk to innocent citizens. Well planned and well played IMHO. Will be interesting to see how they handle the remaining pathetic losers that decided to stick around. Guessing the little weasels will give up when their snacks and vanilla coffee creamer runs out.

Be well all.
 
michaelcj said:
I also have trouble understanding what "returned to the States" actually means.
Click to expand...
I think you get the gist of it; it's a political weasel phrase meant to imply that the land was taken from the states somehow, when in fact only the original 13 colonies and Texas had a preexisting claim to state sovereignty.

Whether the feds should grant this land to the states is a policy dispute, NOT a matter of the states' so-called right to the land. The latter concept is a sham propagated by advocates of transferring the land.
michaelcj said:
Now Texas…. well…. it is Texas after all….. even they pleaded with congress for 3 years before they were admitted as a State.
Click to expand...
Texas is different because it was a republic with sovereignty over the land prior to becoming a state, and it retained this sovereignty upon statehood. Additionally, vast areas were already in private hands prior to the Revolution, with some owners having title dating to the time of Spanish rule. Real estate speculation was a Texas tradition well before Texas was a republic. :)

Furthermore, Texas in the mid 19th century was far from the financial, petrochemical, and agricultural powerhouse of today; it was basically a vast unpopulated backwater with very little infrastructure or tax base, so the state government had few options for raising revenue except selling land, and they had LOTS of that, so selling is what they did. Almost all of it was sold to private owners by the turn of the 20th century, except for relatively small areas that the state retained for specific purposes (e.g. schools), a few REALLY remote and arid areas that nobody wanted, or areas without clear title (mostly slivers left over as a result of surveying mistakes). AFAIK all federal land in TX was purchased by the Feds or taken via eminent domain subsequent to statehood.
 
Last edited:
Doc, Indian title to public lands has all been extinguished. The Paiute Tribe 'owns' a Reservation, carved out of the Public Domain, but that's all.

They do have treaty rights to hunt, fish, and worship in their 'usual and accustomed places, on public lands, and artifacts and archaeologic sites are protected by law, but that's it.

The Tribal demand for their removal was political posturing. It certainly won't make them any friends in Eastern Oregon, now that someone was killed.
 
Sorry,
I deleted my response. Perhaps
If you look up how & why the
Feds manage certain lands for
Amerindians, you'll get a better
Understanding of why the Piautes
we're so ticked off at the Militia.
They demanded that the Feds
remove them. If it were not their
Lands, then the Piautes would have
never had any legal legs to stand
on.
 
Last edited:
carguychris,

You got me, I did have my tongue firmly planted in both cheeks… ;)

Regarding Tejas….. Born in Ft. Worth lived up near Palo Duro until I was 15. So I do understand the uniqueness of its history.

Mike
 
Doc, the Paiutes don't own the land. Their demand was posturing. Their only legal interest in the matter is protection of artifacts and archaeological sites, most of which consist of lithic scatter and grinding stones.
 
I'm around native folks a great deal.

I've spent years in and around four different reservations. I've lost count of how many different enrolled tribes I have friends in. If this was truly Paiute land I guarantee that they were very unhappy with these people that they would have almost certainly seen as trespassers who had illegally seized land belonging to the tribe in the abstract and each of them personally, not the federal govt.
It would be as if these guys seized a part of your ranch protesting federal policy except that tribal people are understandably very touchy about other people taking the land that they have left.
Calling a govt. agency to kick these people off of your land would be an entirely appropriate action. By current law that has to do with how non tribal folks are handled on tribal land federal law enforcement might have no choice but to go in if asked by the rightful tribal government. By law these tribes and their land are sovereign nations folks. This creates some odd situations when it comes to law enforcement.
 
I just wish that we were simply told the truth about the matter, but I doubt that will ever happen. There will be spin from both sides.
Click to expand...

There are three sides to every story. The one side's, the other side's, and the truth that usually falls somewhere in between.
I'd like to know the truth as well.
 
The Paiute is a federally recognized Indian tribe that inhabits southeastern Oregon, southern Idaho, Northern California and Nevada. The Burns Paiute Tribe’s ancestral territory includes the area now managed as the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, about 30 miles south of Burns.

The tribe’s ancestors signed a treaty with the federal government in 1868. The treaty was not ratified by Congress, but the government guaranteed that it would protect the safety and property of the Northern Paiute people, according to the tribe.

“The protesters have no claim to this land,” “It belongs to the native people who continue to live here. The Malheur Wildlife Refuge is an important place for us. We have no sympathy for those who are trying to take the land from its rightful owners.”

The tribe has about 420 members and 10,000 acres, Also the Amerindians tribes OWN 2-3% of the land in the US.
Generally on most Reservations the individual Tribes have their own LEO Force.
When need then they invite the local LEOs or usually the Feds onto their Reservation to assist them.

When there is a problem on most Reservations the Tribal LEOs take care of it. The only time that the Feds or local LEOs are allowed in is when they are invited.

Most people living in Florida are aware of this. The 2 major Tribes have similar
arrangements with the Law. One of these Tribes has never signed a Treaty with the US and technically still at War.
I suggest you look this info up. It is clearly spelled out what the Tribes own and what is held and cared for by the Fed. Government.

If you have any questions or different opinions, please go to
www.BIA.GOV and read up on this for yourselves.
Sorry to keep bringing this up but the the Bundy's messed up big time by not knowing what or where they would make their stand.

We White Eyes are an arrogant Bunch Aren't We??
 
Last edited:
This is pure conjecture on my part:
It seems like LE waited until they could arrest the lead horses, and when they had their opportunity they moved.
Click to expand...

This I believe was part of along with the lessons they learned from Waco. You have folks, the leaders and supporters that claim they won't give up and are willing to die and are holed up somewhere with women and children and it gets real ugly fast when you try to invade that space. The Feds had all the time in the world to wait these folks out safely.......and they did.
 
Doc, you need to read a little further. I spent 40 years working with federal title in the west, and I guarantee you the Paiute title to the land at Malheur Lakes is extinguished.

See this link for a map and discussion of the 1879 Reservation, and it's conversion to Public Domain following the Bannock War. Further, you will note the location of the original Reservation lies north of the Malheur Lakes basin, miles away from the Refuge on the south littoral.

The tribal involvement in this matter was political, not titular. The federal governments only responsibility to the tribe in this occupation was to ensure that native artifacts and archaeological sites were not destroyed or disturbed.

http://www.oregonhistoryproject.org...ords/malheur-indian-reservation/#.Vqpo34-cGM9

There is a great deal of posturing and claims made by most of the tribes from time to time about ownership, and 99% of is wistful.
 
Long before this instance I was told when you stop an armed person(s) in a vehicle you are almost always guaranteed a chase that escalates to a fight. I believe that was used by HRT as a justification for surrounding one kidnappers home with victims still inside following criticism they knew he was regularly leaving alone and could be seized on the road without endangering victims. I can't remember the case, so I may be remembering that wrong. It may have been some local SWAT team and not HRT at all, although I remember it being a case where the victim had been held for an extended period of time so FBI must have been involved. Hell, maybe it was just a fictional movie.

I realize the location this happened in must have been remote with no innocents, but I wonder about the wisdom of trying to stop an armed caravan. Not just for those stopped, but also the safety of the LEO involved in the stop. I'm guessing it isn't legal to use stop sticks before attempting to stop the vehicles, and that might not improve the chances of a non-violent stop.

I was really hoping to read at lunch that all those at the reserve had gone home or surrendered into custody.
 
The road runs between Burns and John Day, through Ukiah, all are medium-sized towns. Maybe 12,000 people between them, and ranches in between public lands. You can drive the whole route and see maybe 40 vehicles. They picked a good place.
 
His arms were up,
Click to expand...

That's not at all true. He got out with his hands up, but when an officer approached Finicum ignored his commands and then reached into an inside jacket pocket twice, and was then shot (from behind) by a second officer. They found a loaded 9mm in the pocket he was reaching into.

https://youtu.be/gjl1hefqqWI

Go to about 5:30
 
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/fb...of-occupier/ar-BBoPAl8?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=AARDHP

He got out with his arms up, then reached into his coat pocket--twice. He got shot.

Not having the audio we are all second guessing the report by the FBI, but my guess is Finicum was ordered to keep his hands in the air--most likely repeatedly and loudly. He made a bad decision. Finicum had declared he would rather die that live in a concrete box.

Sad that this turned out how it did. But most of us here were speculating the outcome could be violent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top