BURNS, Ore. (AP) — A peaceful protest Saturday in support of an eastern Oregon ranching family facing jail time for arson was followed shortly afterward by an occupation of a building at a national wildlife refuge.

Ammon Bundy, the son of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, who was involved in a standoff with the government over grazing rights, told The Oregonian he and two of his brothers were among a group of dozens of people occupying the headquarters of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.

Bundy posted a video on his Facebook page asking for people to come help him. Below the video is this statement: "**ALL PATRIOTS ITS TIME TO STAND UP NOT STAND DOWN!!! WE NEED YOUR HELP!!! COME PREPARED."

Ammon Bundy said the group planned to stay at the refuge indefinitely.

"We're planning on staying here for years, absolutely," Ammon Bundy said. "This is not a decision we've made at the last minute."

An Idaho militia leader who helped organize the earlier march said he knew nothing about activities after a parade of militia members and local residents in Burns walked past the sheriff's office and the home of Dwight Hammond Jr. and his son Steven.

Beth Anne Steele, an FBI spokeswoman in Portland, told The Associated Press the agency was aware of the situation at the national wildlife refuge. She made no further comment.

Some local residents feared the Saturday rally would involve more than speeches, flags and marching. But the only real additions to that list seemed to be songs, flowers and pennies.

As marchers reached the courthouse, they tossed hundreds of pennies at the locked door. Their message: civilians were buying back their government. After the march passed, two girls swooped in to scavenge the pennies.

A few blocks away, Hammond and his wife Susan greeted marchers, who planted flower bouquets in the snow. They sang some songs, Hammond said a few words, and the protesters marched back to their cars.

Dwight Hammond has said he and his son plan to peacefully report to prison Jan. 4 as ordered by the judge.

Dwight Hammond, 73, and Steven Hammond, 46, said they lit the fires in 2001 and 2006 to reduce the growth of invasive plants and protect their property from wildfires.

The two were convicted of the arsons three years ago and served time — the father three months, the son one year. But a judge ruled their terms were too short under federal law and ordered them back to prison for about four years each.

The decision has generated controversy in a remote part of the state.

In particular, the Hammonds' new sentences touched a nerve with far right groups who repudiate federal authority.

Ammon Bundy and a handful of militiamen from other states arrived last month in Burns, some 60 miles from the Hammond ranch.

In an email to supporters, Ammon Bundy criticized the U.S. government for a failed legal process.

BURNS, Ore. (AP) — A peaceful protest Saturday in support of an eastern Oregon ranching family facing jail time for arson was followed shortly afterward by an occupation of a building at a national wildlife refuge.

Ammon Bundy, the son of Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, who was involved in a standoff with the government over grazing rights, told The Oregonian (http://is.gd/bK7d4E ) that he and two of his brothers were among a group of dozens of people occupying the headquarters of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.

Bundy posted a video on his Facebook page asking for people to come help him. He said "this is not a time to stand down. It's a time to stand up and come to Harney County," where Burns is located. Below the video is this statement: "(asterisk)(asterisk)ALL PATRIOTS ITS TIME TO STAND UP NOT STAND DOWN!!! WE NEED YOUR HELP!!! COME PREPARED."

Ammon Bundy said the group planned to stay at the refuge indefinitely. "We're planning on staying here for years, absolutely," Ammon Bundy said. "This is not a decision we've made at the last minute."


Harney County Sheriff Dave Ward told people to stay away from the building as authorities work to defuse the situation, the Oregonian reported.

"A collective effort from multiple agencies is currently working on a solution. For the time being please stay away from that area. More information will be provided as it becomes available. Please maintain a peaceful and united front and allow us to work through this situation," Ward said in a statement.

An Idaho militia leader who helped organize the earlier march said he knew nothing about activities after a parade of militia members and local residents in Burns walked past the sheriff's office and the home of Dwight Hammond Jr. and his son Steven.

Ammon Bundy's father, Cliven Bundy, told Oregon Public Broadcasting on Saturday night that he had nothing to do with the takeover of the building.

Bundy said his son felt obligated to intervene on behalf of the Hammonds.

"That's not exactly what I thought should happen, but I didn't know what to do," he said. "You know, if the Hammonds wouldn't stand, if the sheriff didn't stand, then, you know, the people had to do something. And I guess this is what they did decide to do. I wasn't in on that."

His son Ammon told him they are committed to staying in the building, Cliven Bundy told Oregon Public Broadcasting.

"He told me that they were there for the long run. I guess they figured they're going to be there for whatever time it takes_and I don't know what that means," Cliven Bundy said. "I asked him, 'Well how long can ya, how long you going to stand out there?' He just told me it was for long term."

Beth Anne Steele, an FBI spokeswoman in Portland, told The Associated Press the agency was aware of the situation at the national wildlife refuge. She made no further comment.

Some local residents feared the Saturday rally would involve more than speeches, flags and marching. But the only real additions to that list seemed to be songs, flowers and pennies.

As marchers reached the courthouse, they tossed hundreds of pennies at the locked door. Their message: civilians were buying back their government. After the march passed, two girls swooped in to scavenge the pennies.

A few blocks away, Hammond and his wife, Susan, greeted marchers, who planted flower bouquets in the snow. They sang some songs, Hammond said a few words, and the protesters marched back to their cars.

Dwight Hammond has said he and his son plan to peacefully report to prison Jan. 4 as ordered by the judge.

Dwight Hammond, 73, and Steven Hammond, 46, said they lit the fires in 2001 and 2006 to reduce the growth of invasive plants and protect their property from wildfires.

The two were convicted of the arsons three years ago and served time — the father three months, the son one year. But a judge ruled their terms were too short under federal law and ordered them back to prison for about four years each.

The decision has generated controversy in a remote part of the state.

In particular, the Hammonds' new sentences touched a nerve with far right groups who repudiate federal authority.

Ammon Bundy and a handful of militiamen from other states arrived last month in Burns, some 60 miles from the Hammond ranch.

In an email to supporters, Ammon Bundy criticized the U.S. government for a failed legal process.

 LordofHats wrote:
Neither article explains much the details of the Hammonds so I found this for the thread; Linky. He sounds like a Bundy kind of guy.

 LordofHats wrote:
Option 4, all of the above.

Only way this ends without people dying is, unfortunately, by a crazy militia to grow some sense and stop being crazy, and since when is that something crazy militias do?

 Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:
Is this the same Bundy guy from that dakka thread ages ago? The one Frazz wanted to run over with an Abrahams tank or something?

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Why would the Bundy's do all this for two people that are voluntarily reporting to prison?

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Why would the Bundy's do all this for two people that are voluntarily reporting to prison?

“In public, they haven’t asked for our help,” Bundy told OPB. “In private, we’re still needed. I talked to Dwight Hammond…for probably close to an hour. His conclusion is basically, ‘I do not want to be shot in the head.’ He had fear that if he actually rejected what was going on, and stood up for the abuse in what was going on, there would be somebody who would actually kill him. Fear, is what their problem is.”

 LordofHats wrote:

 Dreadwinter wrote:
Why would the Bundy's do all this for two people that are voluntarily reporting to prison?

This is what the Bundy's say is happening;

“In public, they haven’t asked for our help,” Bundy told OPB. “In private, we’re still needed. I talked to Dwight Hammond…for probably close to an hour. His conclusion is basically, ‘I do not want to be shot in the head.’ He had fear that if he actually rejected what was going on, and stood up for the abuse in what was going on, there would be somebody who would actually kill him. Fear, is what their problem is.”

Link

This will definitely end differently. The Feds wanted to avoid a shoot out with a bunch of loonies at Bundy's private residence for risk of the PR fallout ala Waco Texas, but occupying a Federal building by force is a very different situation. I'd argue the government's previous attempt to end the situation peacefully has emboldened this behavior from this particular group. They negotiated with 'terrorists' as it were, and now those terrorists have gone off and done something even worse.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Can someone explain how this group are terrorists? Who are they terrorising? Have they attacked civilians or done any other terrorist acts? I can't find anything. All they seem to do is protesting. As long as they stay peaceful, they are not terrorists (a terrorists is someone who uses terror to achieve political goals, not any anti-government protester as some seem to think) If they occupy a building, try to negotiate first, and if that fails, just ignore them. Without (media) attention, they will get tired after a while and leave.

 CptJake wrote:

Folks are calling for the gov't to move in and 'take them out' and similarly phrased violent acts. Is occupying an empty building in the woods causing that much of an inconvenience? The Occupy Wall Street group and their associated groups around the country were a lot more harmful to the local businesses and residents than these guys seem to be at this point, and I would bet many of you calling for this group to be taken out by the Feds acted appalled when local cops went into the Occupy areas and pepper sprayed some protestor.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:


They have illegally occupied public property, armed with guns, and threatened violence to anyone seeking to legally remove them. They are specifically seeking an armed confrontation with the agents of the democratically elected federal government. They are only peaceful now because they haven't been challenged. How is that peaceful? 'Come anywhere near us, in pursuit of the law, and we'll shoot you' isn't peaceful, it's a direct threat.

They are seditionists, traitors and most certainly terrorists. They should be removed with all necessary force.

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:

 Iron_Captain wrote:
Can someone explain how this group are terrorists? Who are they terrorising? Have they attacked civilians or done any other terrorist acts? I can't find anything. All they seem to do is protesting. As long as they stay peaceful, they are not terrorists (a terrorists is someone who uses terror to achieve political goals, not any anti-government protester as some seem to think) If they occupy a building, try to negotiate first, and if that fails, just ignore them. Without (media) attention, they will get tired after a while and leave.

They have illegally occupied public property, armed with guns, and threatened violence to anyone seeking to legally remove them. They are specifically seeking an armed confrontation with the agents of the democratically elected federal government. They are only peaceful now because they haven't been challenged. How is that peaceful? 'Come anywhere near us, in pursuit of the law, and we'll shoot you' isn't peaceful, it's a direct threat.

They are seditionists, traitors and most certainly terrorists. They should be removed with all necessary force.

sirlynchmob wrote:

 MeanGreenStompa wrote:


They have illegally occupied public property, armed with guns, and threatened violence to anyone seeking to legally remove them. They are specifically seeking an armed confrontation with the agents of the democratically elected federal government. They are only peaceful now because they haven't been challenged. How is that peaceful? 'Come anywhere near us, in pursuit of the law, and we'll shoot you' isn't peaceful, it's a direct threat.

They are seditionists, traitors and most certainly terrorists. They should be removed with all necessary force.

You mean they started the revolution that all the 2nd amendment guys have been waiting for. Why isn't everyone grabbing their guns and going to help? It's why you have the 2nd, to stand up to a tyrannical government right? Yet here everyone is calling them terrorist and expecting them to die. weird.

seems the dream of owning a gun to protect yourself from the government is over.