Assholes making trouble in Oregon

[Camp]

nbcnews.com/news/us-news/oregon-occupiers-face-charges-when-siege-ends-sheriff-n491366

goes nowhere.

Try this one

nbcnews.com/news/us-news/oregon-occupiers-face-charges-when-siege-ends-sheriff-n491366

 

[Skylar]

What does that have to do with whether the buildings are empty or not, Don Quixote?

Are you claiming the building was occupied with Bundy showed up?

Nope. They broke and entered over a holiday weekend. Then burglarized it.

Its adorable listening to your ilk try and use terms like 'abandonment' like they have a fucking clue what they're talking about. Its like watching a 4 year old try on his daddy's shoes.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You're that lied and claimed 'According to Skylar, the Bundy group is going through computer files.'

You know that's not my position. You've quoted me saying otherwise. You intentionally lied, intentionally misrepresented my position.

If your claims had merit, you wouldn't have had to lie or use the Strawman fallacy.

Since you DID post that he was going through files and possibly computer files, the lie is entirely yours.

Oh, and do learn what terms mean...

Fallacy: Straw Man

From where its rightful owners left it. Possession was deprived from its rightful owners with the seditious conspirators taking possession and use of the same. With the seditious conspirators then using it to destroy government property.

And stupidly, admitting to it.

Possession was deprived in what way?

Oh, you're lying - I get it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Says the poor soul who just insisted that workers going home for the weekend means that their place of work is 'abandoned'. And thus can't have any files in it. For....some reason. You never could explain that.

You really are just making this shit up as you go along, aren't you?

Oh is that what they did, just went home for the weekend?

Speaking of just making shit up....

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

here is what happened when a man plugged his EV to a school house plug

Man arrested for charging EV at son's school. ...a public building that belongs to all...​

 

[Skylar]

You're that lied and claimed 'According to Skylar, the Bundy group is going through computer files.'

You know that's not my position. You've quoted me saying otherwise. You intentionally lied, intentionally misrepresented my position.

If your claims had merit, you wouldn't have had to lie or use the Strawman fallacy.

Since you DID post that he was going through files and possibly computer files, the lie is entirely yours.

Here's my position....which you already know, but chose to misreprsent anyway. Because you're a liar.

As for the 'files on computers', he got the file part right.

The leader of a small, armed group occupying a national wildlife refuge in southeastern Oregon said Monday he and his followers are going through government documents stored inside refuge buildings.

Leader of armed group says he, his followers are going through government files to show discrimination against ranchers - 1/11/2016 6:29:39 PM | Newser

The only part that isn't confirmed is the militia going through computers. They're definitely going through the files.

Post 2025
Assholes making trouble in Oregon

Try again, liar. The more you make shit up, the more you demonstrate my point: if your argument had merit, you wouldn't have to lie.

Oh, and do learn what terms mean...

Fallacy: Straw Man

And who here has argued anti-semitism? No one. You attributed to posters positions they've never taken, refuting arguments people didn't make.

That's the strawman fallacy. Between the fallacies and the lies, you're not exactly painting a picture of an argument you're confident about.

Possession was deprived in what way?

The owners can't use it. The thieves who stole it can and have. The thieves have possession. The rightful owners don't.

That's theft.

 

[RollingThunder]

But they did do it, and they are doing it now. They have brought children to a gun fight, or at least, a potential gunfight. Those women and children are being used as shields.

Again, prove it. When did they actually use women and children as shields. Show me now in this event where they are using women and children as shields. Just having them present does NOT prove that they are being used as shields.

It is amazing how those who are blindingly supporting the .gov side are letting their truth be twisted and distorted.

You clueless fool!

Here are the facts that you choose to remain willfully blind to....In a very good sumary of the entire situation, and the background of the conflict, and some of the various reactions to this armed occupation.

Militia occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge

Here's a few choice excerpts...

On January 2, 2016, armed[8] members of rump militias occupied the headquarters building at the United States Fish and Wildlife Service's Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in rural southeastern Oregon in protest of the pending imprisonment of ranchers Dwight Hammond and his son, Steven Hammond. The two were convicted on charges of arson in 2012 for unlawfully setting fire to federal land under a domestic anti-terrorism law after setting brush fires to clear grazing land without the required permit.[9]Ammon Bundy, the leader of the group now calling themselves Citizens for Constitutional Freedom, said he began leading the occupation after receiving a divine message from God ordering him to do so.[10][11]

Although their sentences and imprisonment were a stated cause of the dispute, the Hammonds have repeatedly rejected the intervention of militias. Dwight Hammond's wife stated, "I don't really know the purpose of the guys who are out there."

Some of the militia members stated that they were ready to "kill and be killed" in the standoff.[13] The takeover sparked a debate in the U.S. on the meaning of the word "terrorist" in the context of domestic terrorism in the country, and furthermore on how the media and law enforcement treat situations involving people of different ethnicities or religions.[14][15][16]

Dwight Hammond, a cattle rancher in Harney County, owns 12,000 acres (4,900 ha) of land, much of which abuts public land. In 1994, Hammond and his son Steve obstructed the construction of a fence to delineate the boundary between the two parcels of property, prompting their arrest by federal agents. According to federal officials, construction of the fence was needed to stop the Hammond cattle from moving along a cattle trail that intersected public land after the Hammonds had repeatedly violated the terms of their permit, which limited when they could move their cows across refuge property.[25]Officials also reported Hammond had made threats against them in 1986 and 1988, including telling one public lands manager that he was going to "tear off his head and shit down his neck". They also contended Steve Hammond had called them "assholes".[26]

In 1999, Steve Hammond started a fire with the intent of burning off juniper trees and sagebrush, but the fire escaped onto BLM land. The agency reminded Hammond of the required burn permit and that if the fires continued, there would be legal consequences.[27] Both Dwight and Steve Hammond would later on set two additional fires that would lead to arson convictions.[28]

Hammond arson case

In 2012, a federal district court jury found Dwight and Steve Hammond guilty of arson, for fires they had started on the federal land adjacent to their property in 2001 and 2006.[29]

The 2001 Hardie-Hammond Fire began according to Probation Officer Robb, when hunters in the area witnessed the Hammonds illegally slaughter a herd of deer.[30] Less than two hours later, a fire erupted and forced the hunters to leave the area.[31] Later, Steve's nephew Dusty Hammond testified that his uncle told him to start lighting matches and "light the whole countryside on fire." Dusty also testified that he was "almost burned up in the fire" and had to flee for his life.[27][32] The Hammonds have falsely claimed they started the fire to stop invasive plants from growing onto their grazing fields.[33]

The 2006 Krumbo Butte Fire started out as a wildfire, but several illegal backburns were set by the Hammonds with the intent to protect their winter feed. The backfires were set under the cover of night without warning the firefighting camp that was known to be on the slopes above.[31][34] According to the indictment, the fires threatened to trap four BLM firefighters, one of whom later confronted Dwight Hammond at the fire scene after having moved his crews to avoid the threat.[31][32] Two days later, Steve Hammond threatened to frame a BLM employee with arson if he didn't stop the investigation.[33]

Following their conviction, federal prosecutors requested a five-year sentence for each of the Hammonds as provided for under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA).[34] The AEDPA provides that arson on federal land carries a five-year mandatory minimum sentence.[35][36] U.S. District Judge Michael Robert Hogan determined sentences of that length "would shock the conscience" and would violate the constitutional prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. Hogan instead sentenced Dwight Hammond to three months' imprisonment and Steve Hammond to a year and a day's imprisonment, which both men served.[37] In what was described by media as a "rare" action, U.S. Attorney Amanda Marshall successfully appealed the sentence to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which upheld the mandatory-minimum law, writing that "given the seriousness of arson, a five-year sentence is not grossly disproportionate to the offense." The court vacated the original sentence and remanded for resentencing. The Hammonds filed petitions for certiorari with the Supreme Court, which the court rejected in March 2015.[35] In October 2015, Chief Judge Ann Aiken re-sentenced the pair to five years in prison (with credit for time served), ordering that they return to prison on January 4, 2016.[35][37] Both of the Hammonds reported to prison in California on January 4 in accordance with the law.[38]

In a separate 2014 civil judgment, the Hammonds were ordered to pay $400,000 in restitution to the U.S. government for the related arson fires. The pair paid half the amount immediately and the remaining $200,000 in December 2015.[34]
***
By late 2015, the Hammond case had attracted the attention of members of the family of Cliven Bundy, including sons Ammon and Ryan. The Bundys publicized the situation via social media, drawing interest from militia groups outside Oregon who sought to publicly endorse the Hammonds to draw attention to unrelated issues.[29][40] The Hammonds rejected the offers of assistance with Hammond attorney W. Alan Schroeder writing that "neither Ammon Bundy nor anyone within his group/organization speak for the Hammond family."[3]When later asked about the occupation, Susan Hammond, the wife of Dwight Hammond, was dismissive and said, "I don't really know the purpose of the guys who are out there."[41]

Harney County sheriff David Ward agreed to meet with the militia members who requested the sheriff's office protect the Hammonds from being taken into custody by federal authorities. Though Ward said he sympathized with the Hammonds' plight, he declined the militias' request. Ward said that he subsequently received death threats by email.[29]

Reactions

Anti-government activists

Cliven Bundy, the father of Ammon and Ryan Bundy, said he was not involved in organizing the takeover of the MNWR facilities and said it was "not exactly what I thought should happen".[40]

Asked about the incident, Mike Vanderboegh, a founder of the 3 Percenters militia, described the occupiers as "a collection of fruits and nuts", described John Ritzheimer as a "fool", and said Ammon Bundy had "a John Brown complex".[90]

The group Oath Keepers (of which Jon Ritzheimer was formerly a member) in a statement published on its website prior to the seizure of the MNWR facilities, said "we cannot force ourselves or our protection on people who do not want it. Dwight and Steven Hammond have made it clear, through their attorney, that they just want to turn themselves in and serve out their sentence. And that clear statement of their intent should be the end of the discussion on this."[91]

Tribal government

The governing council of the Burns Paiute Tribe, an Indian nation whose borders straddled Harney County, declared the occupiers were endangering the tribe's history by their presence and called on them to leave. Tribal chair Charlotte Rodrique went on to explain that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was the protector of traditional Burns Paiute religious and archaeological sites in the area and that the displacement of federal authorities put such locations at risk.[96]

State, and local government

State Representative Cliff Bentz, who represents the region in the Oregon House of Representatives, said that the outside groups do not represents Burns or Harney County, saying, "They're trying to use the misfortune of the Hammonds to further the interests of the Bundys."[97]

In a January 6 press release, the Western State Sheriffs Association (WSSA), an organization representing 800 sheriffs in the American West, said its mission was to "promote the office of Sheriff and to assist our member Sheriffs on issues of mutual concern" and that it had offered Harney County Sheriff David Ward to organize out-of-state resources to send to Oregon if requested. The WSSA statement went on to note that it did not "support efforts of any individual or groups who utilize intimidation, threats or fear in order to further an agenda."[99]

Organizations

The Oregon Cattleman's Association, while maintaining it still supported the Hammonds, released a statement that declared it did "not support illegal activity taken against the government. This includes militia takeover of government property, such as the Malheur Wildlife Refuge."[100]

On January 4, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints issued a statement condemning the militia actions and stating, "While the disagreement occurring in Oregon about the use of federal lands is not a Church matter, Church leaders strongly condemn the armed seizure of the facility and are deeply troubled by the reports that those who have seized the facility suggest that they are doing so based on scriptural principles. This armed occupation can in no way be justified on a scriptural basis."[57][101] The church also released an excerpt from a 1992 speech by Dallin H. Oaks, a senior Mormon religious leader, criticizing the "excessive zeal" of "those patriots who are participating in or provisioning private armies and making private preparations for armed conflict".[57]

The Audubon Society of Portland, in a written statement, said that the "occupation of Malheur by armed, out of state militia groups puts one of America's most important wildlife refuges at risk. It violates the most basic principles of the public trust doctrine and holds hostage public lands and public resources to serve the very narrow political agenda of the occupiers."[102]

Lololol...

Were there too many big words for you to understand, Krazygrl?

Or is just that the very concept of providing evidence about the realities of this situation is foreign to your little retarded rightwingnut mind?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Nope. They broke and entered over a holiday weekend. Then burglarized it.

Its adorable listening to your ilk try and use terms like 'abandonment' like they have a fucking clue what they're talking about. Its like watching a 4 year old try on his daddy's shoes.

And you base that on etchings found on your colon wall?

I never said it was "abandoned," I said it was "empty." You're just lying, as usual.

But tell me more about how the Malheur National Wildlife headquarters "staff" had "gone home for the holiday weekend?"

It's fascinating...

 

[freedombecki]

here is what happened when a man plugged his EV to a school house plug

Man arrested for charging EV at son's school. ...a public building that belongs to all...​

The Principal stands on principle!

 

[Skylar]

Nope. They broke and entered over a holiday weekend. Then burglarized it.

Its adorable listening to your ilk try and use terms like 'abandonment' like they have a fucking clue what they're talking about. Its like watching a 4 year old try on his daddy's shoes.

And you base that on etchings found on your colon wall?

I never said it was "abandoned," I said it was "empty." You're just lying, as usual.

And when did I say you claimed it was abandoned? Quote me, liar.

I said your ilk tried to use the term 'abandonment'. And were comically, laughably wrong. As you can't abandon real property. And certainly not in 24 hours like your fellow idiots have claimed.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

It is OK to take over and occupy Government building when they are not occupied......its not trespassing its just taking it over on the theory that if no one is there it is empty so its all good .....

 

[Uncensored2008]

Here's my position....which you already know, but chose to misreprsent anyway. Because you're a liar.

As for the 'files on computers', he got the file part right.

So you did claim that they took files on computers and have been lying ever since!

Hey, you're a leftist - you lie, it's what you do...

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

lets say you come up on an empty school bus ...its public property ...no one is in it...its perfectly OK to get in the bus and drive off....you are a member of the public you own the bus........

 

[Uncensored2008]

And when did I say you claimed it was abandoned? Quote me, liar.

I said your ilk tried to use the term 'abandonment'. And were comically, laughably wrong. As you can't abandon real property. And certainly not in 24 hours like your fellow idiots have claimed.

Since it isn't my claim and you are attributing it to me, you're just lying.

Hey, you're a leftist, you lie, it's what you do....

 

[koshergrl]

Lol. Poor lefties, have to make stuff up because the reality won't justify the Waco approach to people "occupying" public property.

 

[freedombecki]

But they did do it, and they are doing it now. They have brought children to a gun fight, or at least, a potential gunfight. Those women and children are being used as shields.

Again, prove it. When did they actually use women and children as shields. Show me now in this event where they are using women and children as shields. Just having them present does NOT prove that they are being used as shields.

It is amazing how those who are blindingly supporting the .gov side are letting their truth be twisted and distorted.

You clueless fool!

Here are the facts that you choose to remain willfully blind to....In a very good sumary of the entire situation, and the background of the conflict, and some of the various reactions to this armed occupation.

Militia occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge

Here's a few choice excerpts...

On January 2, 2016, armed[8] members of rump militias occupied the headquarters building at the United States Fish and Wildlife Service's Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in rural southeastern Oregon in protest of the pending imprisonment of ranchers Dwight Hammond and his son, Steven Hammond. The two were convicted on charges of arson in 2012 for unlawfully setting fire to federal land under a domestic anti-terrorism law after setting brush fires to clear grazing land without the required permit.[9]Ammon Bundy, the leader of the group now calling themselves Citizens for Constitutional Freedom, said he began leading the occupation after receiving a divine message from God ordering him to do so.[10][11]

Although their sentences and imprisonment were a stated cause of the dispute, the Hammonds have repeatedly rejected the intervention of militias. Dwight Hammond's wife stated, "I don't really know the purpose of the guys who are out there."

Some of the militia members stated that they were ready to "kill and be killed" in the standoff.[13] The takeover sparked a debate in the U.S. on the meaning of the word "terrorist" in the context of domestic terrorism in the country, and furthermore on how the media and law enforcement treat situations involving people of different ethnicities or religions.[14][15][16]

Dwight Hammond, a cattle rancher in Harney County, owns 12,000 acres (4,900 ha) of land, much of which abuts public land. In 1994, Hammond and his son Steve obstructed the construction of a fence to delineate the boundary between the two parcels of property, prompting their arrest by federal agents. According to federal officials, construction of the fence was needed to stop the Hammond cattle from moving along a cattle trail that intersected public land after the Hammonds had repeatedly violated the terms of their permit, which limited when they could move their cows across refuge property.[25]Officials also reported Hammond had made threats against them in 1986 and 1988, including telling one public lands manager that he was going to "tear off his head and shit down his neck". They also contended Steve Hammond had called them "assholes".[26]

In 1999, Steve Hammond started a fire with the intent of burning off juniper trees and sagebrush, but the fire escaped onto BLM land. The agency reminded Hammond of the required burn permit and that if the fires continued, there would be legal consequences.[27] Both Dwight and Steve Hammond would later on set two additional fires that would lead to arson convictions.[28]

Hammond arson case

In 2012, a federal district court jury found Dwight and Steve Hammond guilty of arson, for fires they had started on the federal land adjacent to their property in 2001 and 2006.[29]

The 2001 Hardie-Hammond Fire began according to Probation Officer Robb, when hunters in the area witnessed the Hammonds illegally slaughter a herd of deer.[30] Less than two hours later, a fire erupted and forced the hunters to leave the area.[31] Later, Steve's nephew Dusty Hammond testified that his uncle told him to start lighting matches and "light the whole countryside on fire." Dusty also testified that he was "almost burned up in the fire" and had to flee for his life.[27][32] The Hammonds have falsely claimed they started the fire to stop invasive plants from growing onto their grazing fields.[33]

The 2006 Krumbo Butte Fire started out as a wildfire, but several illegal backburns were set by the Hammonds with the intent to protect their winter feed. The backfires were set under the cover of night without warning the firefighting camp that was known to be on the slopes above.[31][34] According to the indictment, the fires threatened to trap four BLM firefighters, one of whom later confronted Dwight Hammond at the fire scene after having moved his crews to avoid the threat.[31][32] Two days later, Steve Hammond threatened to frame a BLM employee with arson if he didn't stop the investigation.[33]

Following their conviction, federal prosecutors requested a five-year sentence for each of the Hammonds as provided for under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA).[34] The AEDPA provides that arson on federal land carries a five-year mandatory minimum sentence.[35][36] U.S. District Judge Michael Robert Hogan determined sentences of that length "would shock the conscience" and would violate the constitutional prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. Hogan instead sentenced Dwight Hammond to three months' imprisonment and Steve Hammond to a year and a day's imprisonment, which both men served.[37] In what was described by media as a "rare" action, U.S. Attorney Amanda Marshall successfully appealed the sentence to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which upheld the mandatory-minimum law, writing that "given the seriousness of arson, a five-year sentence is not grossly disproportionate to the offense." The court vacated the original sentence and remanded for resentencing. The Hammonds filed petitions for certiorari with the Supreme Court, which the court rejected in March 2015.[35] In October 2015, Chief Judge Ann Aiken re-sentenced the pair to five years in prison (with credit for time served), ordering that they return to prison on January 4, 2016.[35][37] Both of the Hammonds reported to prison in California on January 4 in accordance with the law.[38]

In a separate 2014 civil judgment, the Hammonds were ordered to pay $400,000 in restitution to the U.S. government for the related arson fires. The pair paid half the amount immediately and the remaining $200,000 in December 2015.[34]
***
By late 2015, the Hammond case had attracted the attention of members of the family of Cliven Bundy, including sons Ammon and Ryan. The Bundys publicized the situation via social media, drawing interest from militia groups outside Oregon who sought to publicly endorse the Hammonds to draw attention to unrelated issues.[29][40] The Hammonds rejected the offers of assistance with Hammond attorney W. Alan Schroeder writing that "neither Ammon Bundy nor anyone within his group/organization speak for the Hammond family."[3]When later asked about the occupation, Susan Hammond, the wife of Dwight Hammond, was dismissive and said, "I don't really know the purpose of the guys who are out there."[41]

Harney County sheriff David Ward agreed to meet with the militia members who requested the sheriff's office protect the Hammonds from being taken into custody by federal authorities. Though Ward said he sympathized with the Hammonds' plight, he declined the militias' request. Ward said that he subsequently received death threats by email.[29]

Reactions

Anti-government activists

Cliven Bundy, the father of Ammon and Ryan Bundy, said he was not involved in organizing the takeover of the MNWR facilities and said it was "not exactly what I thought should happen".[40]

Asked about the incident, Mike Vanderboegh, a founder of the 3 Percenters militia, described the occupiers as "a collection of fruits and nuts", described John Ritzheimer as a "fool", and said Ammon Bundy had "a John Brown complex".[90]

The group Oath Keepers (of which Jon Ritzheimer was formerly a member) in a statement published on its website prior to the seizure of the MNWR facilities, said "we cannot force ourselves or our protection on people who do not want it. Dwight and Steven Hammond have made it clear, through their attorney, that they just want to turn themselves in and serve out their sentence. And that clear statement of their intent should be the end of the discussion on this."[91]

Tribal government

The governing council of the Burns Paiute Tribe, an Indian nation whose borders straddled Harney County, declared the occupiers were endangering the tribe's history by their presence and called on them to leave. Tribal chair Charlotte Rodrique went on to explain that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service was the protector of traditional Burns Paiute religious and archaeological sites in the area and that the displacement of federal authorities put such locations at risk.[96]

State, and local government

State Representative Cliff Bentz, who represents the region in the Oregon House of Representatives, said that the outside groups do not represents Burns or Harney County, saying, "They're trying to use the misfortune of the Hammonds to further the interests of the Bundys."[97]

In a January 6 press release, the Western State Sheriffs Association (WSSA), an organization representing 800 sheriffs in the American West, said its mission was to "promote the office of Sheriff and to assist our member Sheriffs on issues of mutual concern" and that it had offered Harney County Sheriff David Ward to organize out-of-state resources to send to Oregon if requested. The WSSA statement went on to note that it did not "support efforts of any individual or groups who utilize intimidation, threats or fear in order to further an agenda."[99]

Organizations

The Oregon Cattleman's Association, while maintaining it still supported the Hammonds, released a statement that declared it did "not support illegal activity taken against the government. This includes militia takeover of government property, such as the Malheur Wildlife Refuge."[100]

On January 4, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints issued a statement condemning the militia actions and stating, "While the disagreement occurring in Oregon about the use of federal lands is not a Church matter, Church leaders strongly condemn the armed seizure of the facility and are deeply troubled by the reports that those who have seized the facility suggest that they are doing so based on scriptural principles. This armed occupation can in no way be justified on a scriptural basis."[57][101] The church also released an excerpt from a 1992 speech by Dallin H. Oaks, a senior Mormon religious leader, criticizing the "excessive zeal" of "those patriots who are participating in or provisioning private armies and making private preparations for armed conflict".[57]

The Audubon Society of Portland, in a written statement, said that the "occupation of Malheur by armed, out of state militia groups puts one of America's most important wildlife refuges at risk. It violates the most basic principles of the public trust doctrine and holds hostage public lands and public resources to serve the very narrow political agenda of the occupiers."[102]

Lololol...

Were there too many big words for you to understand, Krazygrl?

Or is just that the very concept of providing evidence about the realities of this situation is foreign to your little retarded rightwingnut mind?

Au contraire, mon amie. Laughter is a good outlet for reading about the antics of zealots on either side of the issue, and laughter is often far more eloquent than words.

 

[RollingThunder]

Reeeeeally tough guys...

http://heavy.com/news/2016/01/yallq...refuge-takeover-terrorism-best-funny-memes/1/
http://heavy.com/news/2016/01/yallq...refuge-takeover-terrorism-best-funny-memes/3/

 

[Skylar]

Here's my position....which you already know, but chose to misreprsent anyway. Because you're a liar.

As for the 'files on computers', he got the file part right.

So you did claim that they took files on computers and have been lying ever since!

Hey, you're a leftist - you lie, it's what you do...

And like the liar that you are, you cut out the part of my post that explicitly contradicts your narrative:

As for the 'files on computers', he got the file part right.

The leader of a small, armed group occupying a national wildlife refuge in southeastern Oregon said Monday he and his followers are going through government documents stored inside refuge buildings.

Leader of armed group says he, his followers are going through government files to show discrimination against ranchers - 1/11/2016 6:29:39 PM | Newser

The only part that isn't confirmed is the militia going through computers. They're definitely going through the files.

I explicitly said that the going through computers part isn't confirmed. And you know it. So well in fact, that you intentionally cut out any mention of it in your reply. Why?

You're a liar. You can't help yourself. Even when you know you're just going to humiliate yourself, you can't stop lying. .

If your claims had merit, you woulnd't need to offer us lie after lie. Yet your argument can't survive without it, liar.

 

[koshergrl]

lets say you come up on an empty school bus ...its public property ...no one is in it...its perfectly OK to get in the bus and drive off....you are a member of the public you own the bus........

Nothing has been driven off, nothing has been taken. Locals who have been to the refuge say it's never looked so well cared for. Finally.

 

[koshergrl]

Reeeeeally tough guys...

Yet progressives want them killed. Kind of a weird reaction if it's such a non-event.