What if #OregonUnderAttack Was Referred to As #OccupyOregon?

Media of all stripes has gone into full hyperbolic mode over the news that a Bundy Ranch-style American citizen pushback is taking place against further federal bureaucratic tyranny. Social media is aghast in overreaction, attempting to amplify the taking over of an abandoned building as the State of #OregonUnderAttack.

Except it’s not under attack and yet that extreme embellishment is spreading faster than the wildfires Oregon ranchers were trying to stop with controlled burns.

PolitiStick‘s Greg Campbell gave the facts in a report late Saturday night:

Oregon ranchers Dwight Hammond, 73, and his son Steven Hammond, 46, were found guilty in 2012 of a federal anti-terrorism statute. Their crime was simply doing what the government would not: the ranchers burned areas to neutralize the threats to their land, threats that included invasive species of plants and the ever-looming threat of wildfires. The duo conducted burns that were once routine in the densely-wooded state of Oregon, but that have slowed dramatically in recent decades as militant environmentalists refuse to allow responsible forest management techniques that include burns.

For their “crime,” the Hammonds were charged in connection with a 2001 fire and Steven was charged in connection with a 2006 fire. The judge, U.S. District Judge Michael Hogan, who has since retired, understood that the offenses did not include malice and gave Dwight three months and Steven one year. Both men served their times.

However, in a shocking move, the Obama Administration demanded that the two men who have been out of prison for years be hauled-off to serve the rest of the mandatory minimum for their supposed crimes- five years.

After a lengthy legal process, the notoriously-liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed and sentenced the men to return to prison in October of 2015.

As the two men prepare to return to prison in clear violation of our Constitution’s ban on double jeopardy, conservative ranchers have spoken-up about the tyrannical treatment, including the Bundy Family.

The headlines and rhetoric following the news that a Bundy-inspired occupation of an EMPTY wildlife reserve in Oregon were simply irresponsible at best and dangerously outrageous at worst.

Some examples from the leftstream media and the Democrat Media Complex include:

Shamefully, even the “conservative” Washington Examiner called Ammon Bundy, son of Clive Bundy, an “anti-government extremist” because he said, “We want the government to abide by the Consitution and to abide by the authority that the people have given it.”

“We are using the wildlife refuge as a place for individuals across the United States to come and assist in helping the people of Harney County claim back their lands and resources,” Bundy said.

Somehow, even though no shots have been fired, no injuries have been reported, no property damage, no buildings set on fire, no one killed, no looting, etc., this so-far peaceful act of civil disobedience is being painted as “white domestic terrorism” by leftist haters in social media.

But what about the “Occupy” movement, the anti-American communist movement that was neither peaceful nor non-violent? What about the leftist movement that included pooping on cop cars and rape tents — the movement that included looting and property damage — crimes?

“I think it [Occupy] expresses the frustrations the American people feel,” an understanding Obama said of the Marxism-inspired movement during a press conference on October 6, 2011.

Then in November of 2011, Obama gave a big slobbery kiss to the vile, hateful and lawless Occupy movement, giving a shoutout to the public poopers, saying, “You are the reason I ran for office.”

Do you see how it works? Vile, violent, America-hating leftists that literally had rape tents equals “peaceful protesters.” However, American flag-waving, U.S. Constitution-carrying Americans performing a completely peaceful act of civil disobedience, in order to push back against the unconstitutional act of the federal government stealing state land, that’s branded by progressive leftist Democrats as “domestic white terrorism.”

Got it?

As conservative activist Brooke McGowan put it  Sunday on Facebook — an utterly brilliant point that exposes loony leftist hypocrisy — maybe the Oregon ranchers should change their name to Occupy Oregon:

Brooke McGowan

RELATED: The Absolute Insanity of the World is Proven With #OregonUnderAttack

The bottom line is that the federal government is not entitled to 99.9% of what they call “federal land,” including a stunning 81% the feds claim they own in the State of Nevada.

The fact is, states would have NEVER agreed to a Constitution that allowed such massive land grabs — and they didn’t.

The only constitutional federal land is Washington, D.C., post offices, and, of course, military bases. Land seized for “wildlife” or other leftist imaginations, are completely outside of any realm of constitutionality.

As Thomas Jefferson, Martin Luther King, Jr., and even Gandhi said — paraphrased — people have a moral obligation to disobey unjust laws, en masse.

When standing against tyranny and standing for the U.S. Constitution is considered terrorism or racism, we have completely lost our once great nation.

About the Author

Matthew K. Burke
Matthew K. Burke
A former Washington State U.S. Congressional candidate in 2010, Matthew attended the nation’s first modern day Tea Party in 2009 in Seattle, Washington. He also began writing and blogging that year. Matthew became a Certified Financial Planner in 1995 and was a Financial Advisor for 24 years in his previous life. Matthew was one of the three main writers leading a conservative news site to be one of the top 15 conservative news sites in the U.S. in a matter of months. He brings to PolitiStick a vast amount of knowledge about economics as well as a passion and commitment to the vision that our Founding Fathers had for our Republic.

Send this to a friend