smac97 Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) Here: Quote Ammon Bundy calling for recruits to join defenses during occupation at Oregon wildlife refuge BY NICOLE HENSLEY The leader of an armed militia who seized an Oregon wildlife refuge wants more recruits to hold down the fort, he said via Facebook video in his latest call-to-action. The face of the group, Ammon Bundy, contends that his anti-government movement is just as passive as the peaceful rally that marched through Burns on Saturday, despite a desperate plea for volunteers to beef up security at a federal building. “We also need more of a defense,” Bundy said in the video, shared Sunday night. “We need to make sure there’s enough people here so no one can come down upon us. That is a very real reality right now.” The FBI has taken the lead in ending the takeover. If and when authorities decide to swoop in on Bundy’s base, he and his armed brethren are “absolutely” ready to fight back and open protected lands to local ranchers, miners, loggers and hunters. Although local, state and federal authorities have not publicly announced plans to force the group out of the refuge, Harney County Sheriff David Ward said he is wary of Bundy’s motives. He believes the takeover is not in defense of two ranchers as Bundy claims, but actually a veiled attempt to “overthrow the county and federal government.” Bundy has continued his expansion at the snow-blanketed militia base even as the cattle ranchers that inspired his stunt denied association with the demonstrations and made their way to San Pedro, Calif., to report to a federal prison. Dwight Hammond Jr., 73, and his son, Steven Hammond, 46, were convicted of setting multiple fires to federal land neighboring their Diamond property. The father and son served a short sentence initially, but were slapped with a harsher four-year sentence to adhere to federal guidelines. ... The Hammonds’ ongoing ordeal in Oregon apparently caught Bundy’s eye months after he joined his father, Cliven Bundy, at the Mormon patriarch’s Nevada ranch in 2014. Several of Bundy’s 14 children and armed protesters faced off with federal agents after Cliven Bundy refused to pay off more than a decade of cattle grazing fines. Two of Ammon Bundy’s brothers have joined him at the wildlife refuge for what appears to be a continuation of the family’s passion project against the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. Bundy claims he felt compelled to help the embattled Oregon ranchers after taking on an apparent mission from God. ... His vision became clear in a video shared before he seized the refuge, saying he spent a night praying on how he could help the Hammonds. “I began to understand how the Lord felt about the Hammonds,” said Bundy, who is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. “I clearly understood the Lord was not pleased with what was happening with the Hammonds.” “If we allowed the Hammonds to be continued to be punished, there would be accountability,” Bundy warned. The Bundy family's distaste with the federal government could arguably be compared to the 19th century conflict between Mormons and the Missouri state government. The religious group founded its own militia to take on another militia ordered to exterminate the religious sect. The two forces geared up for the Utah War in 1858 that fizzled without bloodshed. It’s unclear if the Bundy’s occupation will herald a similar result. ... “They are calling for other American patriots to take this stand with them," Peltier told the Portland-based newspaper. "You don't have to be armed. They want everything to be very peaceful. They want the government to hear their grievances." And here: Quote The family behind the Oregon militia cites Mormon beliefs for armed conflicts with the government BY JASON SILVERSTEIN The menacing militia that has taken over a federal building in Oregon for three days (and counting) appears to be under an unlikely influence: Mormonism. The Bundy family — a rancher clan with two brothers leading the Oregon siege and a history of flare-ups with the feds — have been known to cite their Mormon beliefs as justification for firearm-filled feuds with the government. The Bundys’ Book of Mormon dropping started a year ago, when patriarch Cliven Bundy first came to national attention, and continued through the end of 2015, when other Bundys cited scriptures in early warnings about the cause that has now culminated in an armed standoff. Mormon scripture is rife with stories of founder Joseph Smith and his followers going to war — sometimes literally — with the government in the face of persecution. The religion’s early history in the 1800s includes several bloody conflicts with state governments, leading to the murder of Smith and the exile of Mormons to Utah. ... Emails obtained by Buzzfeed News show the Bundys quoting The Book of Mormon while lamenting the fate of the Hammonds, who were facing five years in prison for arson convictions. “The injustices the Hammonds are suffering will be a type and shadow of the suffering the American people will endure if we do not stand and put an end to it,” Carol Bundy, the wife of patriarch Cliven, wrote in one November email. She alludes to a term, “a type and a shadow,” used by a prophet in The Book of Mormon who criticizes a king who treats his people unjustly. Another email sent just days later, this time from son Ammon Bundy, quoted from the Mormon Doctrine and Covenants scripture: “Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn.” ... The Bundy brothers have not cited Mormonism during their siege, and Cliven — despite his public support for the Hammonds — has distanced himself from the armed takeover. The part of this story that garnered my attention was the headline of the second linked story above ("The family behind the Oregon militia cites Mormon beliefs for armed conflicts with the government." That's would news, I suppose. Except the "cite" referenced here appears to consist of a November 17 email from Carol Bundy, Cliven Bundy's wife, in which she purportedly made the following statements: “The injustices the Hammonds are suffering will be a type and shadow of the suffering the American people will endure if we do not stand and put an end to it.” This is apparently supposed to be a reference to Mosiah 13:10, which quotes Abinadi's words to King Noah: "But this much I tell you, what you do with me, after this, shall be as a type and a shadow of things which are to come." There was also an email from Ammon Bundy, apparently dated November 21, in which he purportedly directly quotes D&C 98:9, in which the Lord states: "Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn." The use of the word "Nevertheless" is interesting, as it hearkens to the preceding verses, which discuss in this section. The section heading provides the following context: Quote Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Kirtland, Ohio, August 6, 1833. This revelation came in consequence of the persecution upon the Saints in Missouri. Increased settlement of Church members in Missouri troubled some other settlers, who felt threatened by the Saints’ numbers, political and economic influence, and cultural and religious differences. In July 1833, a mob destroyed Church property, tarred and feathered two Church members, and demanded that the Saints leave Jackson County. Although some news of the problems in Missouri had no doubt reached the Prophet in Kirtland (nine hundred miles away), the seriousness of the situation could have been known to him at this date only by revelation. Now that we have the context, let's take a look at the preceding verses (emphases added): Quote 1 Verily I say unto you my friends, fear not, let your hearts be comforted; yea, rejoice evermore, and in everything give thanks; 2 Waiting patiently on the Lord, for your prayers have entered into the ears of the Lord of Sabaoth, and are recorded with this seal and testament—the Lord hath sworn and decreed that they shall be granted. 3 Therefore, he giveth this promise unto you, with an immutable covenant that they shall be fulfilled; and all things wherewith you have been afflicted shall work together for your good, and to my name’s glory, saith the Lord. 4 And now, verily I say unto you concerning the laws of the land, it is my will that my people should observe to do all things whatsoever I command them. 5 And that law of the land which is constitutional, supporting that principle of freedom in maintaining rights and privileges, belongs to all mankind, and is justifiable before me. 6 Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land; 7 And as pertaining to law of man, whatsoever is more or less than this, cometh of evil. 8 I, the Lord God, make you free, therefore ye are free indeed; and the law also maketh you free. 9 Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn. 10 Wherefore, honest men and wise men should be sought for diligently, and good men and wise men ye should observe to uphold; otherwise whatsoever is less than these cometh of evil. So here are my takeaways from this: 1. First, this is some seriously sloppy reporting. Two passing references to LDS scriptures in two emails (one of which merely lifts a four-word phrase from The Book of Mormon), which were apparently intended to be private, do not justify a headline of "The family behind the Oregon militia cites Mormon beliefs for armed conflicts with the government." 2. The reference to the email from Carol Bundy as citing "Momron beliefs" as grounds "for armed conflicts with the government" (note the plural "conflicts") is particularly egregious. She used a four-word phrase from The Book of Mormon, that's all. And more significantly, her email (which has only been excerpted in news stories AFAIK) "urges supporters to contact Harney County Sheriff David Ward 'in an effort to influence him to stand and protect the Hammonds.'" Encouraging people to contact the sheriff is one thing. Encouraging people to enter into "armed conflicts with the government" is quite spectacularly another. 3. The reference to the email from Ammon Bundy is hardly better. Yes, he apparently cites a passage from the Doctrine and Covenants. But his email appears to be describing his communications with members of the Hammond family: Quote In late November, Ammon Bundy recounted a conversation with Susie Hammond, the wife of one of the Oregon ranchers facing prison time. The email discussed the Hammonds’ fear that their lives were in danger, and Ammon’s attempts to assuage those concerns. “I attempted to instill courage in both Dwight and Susie, but fear had over come them,” Ammon wrote. The email also quoted from the Doctrine and Covenants, another Mormon scripture: “Nevertheless, when the wicked rule the people mourn.” Again, we do not have the full text of the email, but the context cited above pertains to Mr. Bundy's efforts to comfort family members of men who are headed to prison. Nothing in the news reports I have seen thus far suggest that he cited this scriptural passage to justify "armed conflicts with the government." Moreover, the scripture cited, section 98, includes an express instruction from God to the Latter-day Saints about "befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land." This hardly seems to fit the description of "Mormon beliefs" being used as a justification for taking up arms against the U.S. Government. Thanks, -Smac Edited January 4, 2016 by smac97 2
VideoGameJunkie Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 His name is Ammon. Thankfully he is not cutting off people's arms. 1
Thinking Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 You never know how people are going to turn out. Ammon Bundy was the assistant to the president of the mission where my brother served in Minnesota. 1
smac97 Posted January 4, 2016 Author Posted January 4, 2016 Here's another article about "The Bundy Militia’s Particular Brand Of Mormonism." I'm not sure how legit its conclusions are, tho. -Smac
Avatar4321 Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 What ever happened to obeying the laws of the land? 2
rockpond Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 Whether Bundy's claim to be acting out of his Mormon beliefs is accurate or not, the LDS connection will continue to be made by the media. Elder Otterson will need to release a statement if we want to disassociate the Church from this. 1
Duncan Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) I am new to all of this but I am taking it the Bundy's are members, if so how on earth are they not exed or maybe they will be after this edit to add, there is this http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-responds-to-inquiries-regarding-oregon-armed-occupation Edited January 4, 2016 by Duncan 1
Tacenda Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) deleted Edited January 4, 2016 by Tacenda off topic
bluebell Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, rockpond said: Whether Bundy's claim to be acting out of his Mormon beliefs is accurate or not, the LDS connection will continue to be made by the media. Elder Otterson will need to release a statement if we want to disassociate the Church from this. The church just did. Here. Edited January 4, 2016 by bluebell Added link. 1
Tacenda Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) 35 minutes ago, Calm said: Did you just read the title and assumed it was a belief of the group instead of an indictment about how government and police treat whites better than minorities in such situations? Because it seems completely off topic. Sorry, if it's off topic, I thought it relevant, it was my niece who liked it on FB, she adopted two black children and is anti racism. I'll delete it. ETA: In answer to your question...no, just the part about the government treating whites better, seems to be the case here. Edited January 4, 2016 by Tacenda
Calm Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) It is a good topic in and of itself, just very off topic and the headline could be confusing. Posting it with an explanation of what it is about and that you are posting it though only semirelated to the thread's topic because people might find it thoughtprovoking would avoid confusion, imo. Edited January 4, 2016 by Calm 1
VideoGameJunkie Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 Someone's about to get excommunicated. 1
Calm Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 Unless I am behind the times, it would be Brother Otterson. I could have sworn he was retiring though. Did I dream that?
sheilauk Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) So, I've read a couple of articles about this and it seems that the issue is more to do with the Constitution and the Federal Government than any scriptural justification. My questions are - how is the Hammonds situation unconstitutional, how is the making of the wildlife sanctuary unconstitutional and why is Ammon Bundy so concerned 107 years after the event! Seems to me that it is more about a paranoid obsession with the Federal Government rather than helping the Hammonds. Why are so many Americans so, frankly, ridiculously, paranoid about the Federal Government? Seems to me the USA would not exist without it! As for the Hammonds - they should have received the 5 year sentence initially it seems and they lost in an appeal process, so, of course, they complain. No doubt, if there was a federal court case which supported them (eg they were the victims of a federal crime where the Defendant was convicted and sentenced to a long sentence), they'd be totally supportive of the system! As my understanding of the US Constitution is limited, I genuinely would like to know if there is any constitutional justification/issue as claimed or any issue over the Hammonds being returned to prison. (the law in the UK would allow it - if your sentence is illegal or increased on appeal - you get resentenced and are sent to serve any additional time). As for the article - simply sensational "journalism" at its worst. Edited January 4, 2016 by sheilauk 2
VideoGameJunkie Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 I want the nickname Captain Moroni too.
smac97 Posted January 4, 2016 Author Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) So Ammon Bundy posted a YouTube video on January 1. It's about 20 minutes long. He recounts how he came to be involved in the Hammond matter. He recounts a revelation of sorts about how he feels the Lord told him, in answer to prayer, that He (God) is not pleased with what is happening to the Hammonds, and that there will be "accountability" if nothing is done about it. He also uses the phrase "type and shadow." He does not reference the Church, or scriptures, or Mormonism in general. He talks about how he and his family were helped by "the American people" in their struggle against the Federal Government, and that he has passed this on to the Hammonds to encourage them and to tell them that "the American people" will help them to. He also states that the federal prosecutor threatened the Hammonds (that he would arrange to have them sent to a worse prison that the one they are supposed to go to) unless they (the Hammonds) cut off all communications with him (Bundy). He describes this as "tyranny," and that this is a "type and shadow" that will happen to other Americans unless we "stand." He also said that he has done "what the Lord asked" him to do (visiting the Hammonds, writing to government officials, meeting with the sheriff, etc.). He said none of this worked, at which point he felt that he has been "guided and directed" to get individuals together from around the country who understand that the Constitution "is hanging by a thread" and that these abuses are going to continue and that what is happening in Oregon is going to happen to *all* counties across the U.S. unless a "stand is made," and that he is supposed to create a "defense for the people" for the people to use "their" land and resources again and get rid of the "tyranny and chains" upon them, and that what he has been doing is "wisdom in the Lord." He ends the video by asking people to go to Oregon, to decide whether his is a "righteous cause" and whether the Lord "works through individuals" to accomplish His goals. He says "I know that we are to stand, and to do these things now, or we will not have anything to pass on to their children." He also asks people to go to Oregon and "participate in this wonderful thing that the Lord is about to accomplish." Hmm. I have a friend who came to mind as I watched the above video (at 2.0 speed). This friend has strong, passionate beliefs about social/political issues, and also about the LDS Church (he is an active and observant Latter-day Saint). However, as much as I love this friend and respect his views, I cannot help but think that he errs by conflating his political views with his religious views, and also with a strong, strong dose of . . . how should I put it . . . rigidity. Conflating political and religious views can be risky, but adding an attitude of I-know-I'm-right-and-if-you-disagree-with-me-you-are-less-than-me rigidity can really have an adverse effect on the accuracy and reasonableness of the individual's outlook on life and events. I think that is what is happening here. I am not oblivious to misconduct by government officials, to seemingly unfair regulatory actions taken by government bureaucrats under color of law, to bad (that is, what I think are "unconstitutional") decisions reached by courts of law. But at the end of the day we Latter-day Saints have received counsel to obey the law of the land, to "wait patiently" in the face of affliction, to "befriend that law which is the constitutional law of the land," that we should seek out and uphold "honest men and wise men," that "we believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law," and so on. Moreover, the leaders of the Church have "strongly condemned" what Bundy is doing, and that his "armed occupation can in no way be justified on a scriptural basis." I could quote all sorts of scriptures about sustaining the Brethren as well. So while I can, in some ways, perceive and understand how Bro. Bundy has reached this juncture, the Church's published statement appears definitive. I hope Bro. Bundy takes this to heart and surrenders. Thanks, -Smac EDIT TO ADD: I thought these comments were pretty fair: Quote Mormons consider the U.S. Constitution divinely inspired, making federal misbehavior -- or the perception thereof -- more serious than mere politics. Bundy has repeatedly said he feels the federal government is veering from the Constitution and must be stopped, rhetoric scholar Susanna Morrill said is consistent with early Mormon teaching. Morrill, a Lewis and Clark College professor who has studied Mormonism for 20 years, said leaders in the nineteenth-century Church of Latter-day Saints spoke about the country heading the wrong direction. They considered themselves divinely-appointed leaders who would turn things around. But after decades of conflict with the government over polygamy in the 1800s, Morrill said, church leaders encouraged patriotism. In the media, Mormons have become poster children for conservative America. Bundy's rhetoric, though consistent with scripture and early Mormon teaching, is now considered extreme, and Morrill is skeptical about attributing his motives entirely to faith. "While the Mormon stuff seems important, it also seems like these folks just have their own agenda and may be using Mormonism for that," she said. I'm not sure Mr. Bundy is being consciously duplicitous in terms of his motives. He seems rather sincere in what he is saying. But I think Morrill is probably right in that Mr. Bundy has an "agenda" and is "using Mormonism for that," though perhaps subconsciously. Edited January 4, 2016 by smac97 3
rockpond Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 2 hours ago, bluebell said: The church just did. Here. Great statement. Thanks for posting the link!
Scott Lloyd Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 3 hours ago, rockpond said: Whether Bundy's claim to be acting out of his Mormon beliefs is accurate or not, the LDS connection will continue to be made by the media. Elder Otterson will need to release a statement if we want to disassociate the Church from this. Why did you call him "Elder" Otterson?
thesometimesaint Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 Even the Hammonds want nothing to do with the Bundy's. That whole bunch sound like a bunch of kook's, and violent ones at that. race baiting removed
Scott Lloyd Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 1 hour ago, smac97 said: So Ammon Bundy posted a YouTube video on January 1. It's about 20 minutes long. He recounts how he came to be involved in the Hammond matter. He recounts a revelation of sorts about how he feels the Lord told him, in answer to prayer, that He (God) is not pleased with what is happening to the Hammonds, and that there will be "accountability" if nothing is done about it. He also uses the phrase "type and shadow." He does not reference the Church, or scriptures, or Mormonism in general. He talks about how he and his family were helped by "the American people" in their struggle against the Federal Government, and that he has passed this on to the Hammonds to encourage them and to tell them that "the American people" will help them to. He also states that the federal prosecutor threatened the Hammonds (that he would arrange to have them sent to a worse prison that the one they are supposed to go to) unless they (the Hammonds) cut off all communications with him (Bundy). He describes this as "tyranny," and that this is a "type and shadow" that will happen to other Americans unless we "stand." He also said that he has done "what the Lord asked" him to do (visiting the Hammonds, writing to government officials, meeting with the sheriff, etc.). He said none of this worked, at which point he felt that he has been "guided and directed" to get individuals together from around the country who understand that the Constitution "is hanging by a thread" and that these abuses are going to continue and that what is happening in Oregon is going to happen to *all* counties across the U.S. unless a "stand is made," and that he is supposed to create a "defense for the people" for the people to use "their" land and resources again and get rid of the "tyranny and chains" upon them, and that what he has been doing is "wisdom in the Lord." He ends the video by asking people to go to Oregon, to decide whether his is a "righteous cause" and whether the Lord "works through individuals" to accomplish His goals. He says "I know that we are to stand, and to do these things now, or we will not have anything to pass on to their children." He also asks people to go to Oregon and "participate in this wonderful thing that the Lord is about to accomplish." Hmm. I have a friend who came to mind as I watched the above video (at 2.0 speed). This friend has strong, passionate beliefs about social/political issues, and also about the LDS Church (he is an active and observant Latter-day Saint). However, as much as I love this friend and respect his views, I cannot help but think that he errs by conflating his political views with his religious views, and also with a strong, strong dose of . . . how should I put it . . . rigidity. Conflating political and religious views can be risky, but adding an attitude of I-know-I'm-right-and-if-you-disagree-with-me-you-are-less-than-me rigidity can really have an adverse effect on the accuracy and reasonableness of the individual's outlook on life and events. I think that is what is happening here. I am not oblivious to misconduct by government officials, to seemingly unfair regulatory actions taken by government bureaucrats under color of law, to bad (that is, what I think are "unconstitutional") decisions reached by courts of law. But at the end of the day we Latter-day Saints have received counsel to obey the law of the land, to "wait patiently" in the face of affliction, to "befriend that law which is the constitutional law of the land," that we should seek out and uphold "honest men and wise men," that "we believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law," and so on. Moreover, the leaders of the Church have "strongly condemned" what Bundy is doing, and that his "armed occupation can in no way be justified on a scriptural basis." I could quote all sorts of scriptures about sustaining the Brethren as well. So while I can, in some ways, perceive and understand how Bro. Bundy has reached this juncture, the Church's published statement appears definitive. I hope Bro. Bundy takes this to heart and surrenders. Thanks, -Smac EDIT TO ADD: I thought these comments were pretty fair: I'm not sure Mr. Bundy is being consciously duplicitous in terms of his motives. He seems rather sincere in what he is saying. But I think Morrill is probably right in that Mr. Bundy has an "agenda" and is "using Mormonism for that," though perhaps subconsciously. There's nothing new under the sun. Bo Gritz was doing this sort of thing back in the 1980s and '90s.
Calm Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) Did he actually undertake any actions besides legal suits and political runs? Add-on: from the wiki, he actually sounds like he would oppose the takeover since he worked towards resolving some in the past peacefully and walked out on one group that wasn't cooperating. Edited January 4, 2016 by Calm
cinepro Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 5 hours ago, Thinking said: You never know how people are going to turn out. Ammon Bundy was the assistant to the president of the mission where my brother served in Minnesota. Well now we know where his over-inflated sense of self-importance came from... 4
Robert F. Smith Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 See http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/66726-church-condemns-peaceful-protest/?page=2#comment-1209574853 .
Damien the Leper Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 Scott, is DN doing any reporting on this? Smac, thanks for your objective commentary. You've helped clear my perspective considerably. I'm not a fan of Jon Ritzheimer, a supporter from AZ. I've counter protested Ritzheimer several times. This group is being nicknamed "Y'all Qaeda" all over social media. Hehehe. From a legal standpoint, can they be charged with sedition? Also, I got this from the FBI website: "Domestic terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics: Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law; Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping; and Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S. What are your thoughts?
Recommended Posts