'Militia' continues siege of Oregon government building
Critics accuse US authorities of double standards as police adopt wait-and-see approach to armed men in building.
|
A group of self-described militiamen continue to occupy a federal building in the remote high desert of the US state of Oregon in protest against a prison sentence for local ranchers accused of burning government land.
Ammon Bundy told local newspaper The Oregonian on Sunday that he and two of his brothers were among "dozens of men" occupying the headquarters of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, close to the town of Burns in Harney county, to show support for the two men sentenced to prison for arson.
"I feel we are in a situation where if we do not do something, if we do not take a hard stand, we'll be in a position where we'll be no longer able to do so," he said.
Ammon Bundy told local newspaper The Oregonian on Sunday that he and two of his brothers were among "dozens of men" occupying the headquarters of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge, close to the town of Burns in Harney county, to show support for the two men sentenced to prison for arson.
"I feel we are in a situation where if we do not do something, if we do not take a hard stand, we'll be in a position where we'll be no longer able to do so," he said.
Dwight Hammond, 73, and Steven Hammond, 46, were convicted of arson three years ago and served time - the father three months, the son one year. But a judge ruled their terms were too short under US federal law and ordered them back to prison for about four years each.
The decision has generated controversy. In particular, the Hammonds' new sentences touched a nerve with far right groups who repudiate US federal authority.
The protest which started off as a rally on Saturday in support of the two men, quickly turned into a platform to raise issues of ongoing land-disputes in the state.
 |
| Aamon Bundy says he and others are occupying the building because "the people have been abused long enough" |
Bundy posted a video on his Facebook page asking for "militia" members from across the country 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."
Harney County Sheriff Dave Ward told residents to stay away from the building as authorities work to defuse the situation, the Oregonian newspaper reported. No workers were on duty when the occupiers arrived.
"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.
But the authorities' approach to the group of armed men occupying a federal building in the US has come under intense criticism.
But the authorities' approach to the group of armed men occupying a federal building in the US has come under intense criticism.
Commentators and activists online have criticised the media for failing to cover the situation accurately, and have also accused the security services of a soft approach to the armed occupiers.
Debates have raged on social media under the #OregonUnderAttack , and newspapers have battled to reach consensus on how to describe the armed men.
"As of Sunday afternoon, The Washington Post called them "occupiers." The New York Times opted for "armed activists" and "militia men." And the Associated Press put the situation this way: "A family previously involved in a showdown with the federal government has occupied a building at a national wildlife refuge in Oregon and is asking militia members to join them," The Washington Post said .
The Hammonds, who are set to turn themselves in Monday afternoon, have made it clear that they don't want help from the Bundy group.
"Neither Ammon Bundy nor anyone within his group/organisation speak for the Hammond family," the Hammonds' lawyer W. Alan Schroeder wrote to Sheriff Ward.
"Militia continues siege of Oregon government building". Al-Jazeera English. Al-Jazeera. 04/01/16. 04/01/16.
I chose this article because it talks about quite an unusual and unique event, as well it highlights a terrible double standard within the American justice system . The article really shows the information well, and since it is not an American news agency I believe that it is quite unbiased. The article is mainly aimed at adult Americans. As well, the writer brings up an interesting point that the federal government, police, or other security agencies have not taken immediate action. The point that if these people had been black or Muslim they would be dead already is quite valid. Truthfully, the American government should take decisive action against an action which is a crime and an act of terror. It is interesting that when extremist Muslims shoot people or fight for their religious cause they are labeled as terrorists, and are killed on site. When a black gunman commits a crime it is gang or drug-affiliated and are also shot on site. However if a white man shoots up a church full of old people he is "mentally ill", when he shoots up a school he was "depressed". Non-white terrorists are almost always shot by police, or locked up in some concentration camp like Guantanamo Bay. Yet white people who commit similar acts of terror are put in an institution for the mentally ill. Honestly, the United States needs to take decisive action on this self proclaimed "militia". If the federal government chooses to remain passive can they really claim that all men are equal under the law?
Quite interesting thoughts. Brought up the sensitive issue and questioned well. I can see where you are coming from and why you think that way. Mentioned authors bias and yours well. Agree that United States should take immediate and decisive actions towards this self proclaimed "militia".
ReplyDelete