The hawaiian protesters were non-violent, and they were ARRESTED for their civil disobedience. They actually have ancestral history on the land there, they have ancestors buried on the land.

Did the Malheur wackos have ancestors buried in the bird refuge?

The Hawaiian protesters can legitimately claim the land was stolen from their people and that is why they were peacefully protesting.

The Malheur occupiers were using threat of violence to protest the conviction of guys that set a fire on federal land to destroy evidence of poaching, and another fire that endangered BLM employees.

The Hawaiian protesters were trying to protect their cultural heritage, The Malheur malcontents were vandalizing the native american’s cultural heritage:
http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2016/02/17/its-so-disgusting-malheur-militia-dug-latrine-trenches-among-sacred-artifacts-163454

Stop and THINK before you claim these ridiculous false equivalencies…

Conservatives are supposedly against Eminent Domain, when its used to force private owners to surrender their property for public use, like building schools and highways. However, Conservatives never seem to have a problem when Eminent Domain is used for land giveaways to big oil companies.

As for the Bundy case, that was not “state land”. Its Federal Land, owned by the US government, but available for private use providing certain regulations are observed. Now maybe that is open to debate and compromise, but the Bundy Militias used roadblocks, snipers and gunmen to drive off the Feds and then they occupied and trashed government property and interfered with legitimate government activities.

And why? Because the ranchers refused to pay their land use fees, and refused to follow range conservation practices so they could over-graze their mangy-ass cattle on MY land. It does NOT belong to the State of Nevada, and it does NOT belong to Bundy. It belongs to the US Government until legislation says otherwise, and through the BLM, to you and me. There are constitutional means to change that.

The observatory issue is different, its about whether land of cultural significance to the native Hawaiians can be used for scientific purposes. I tend to favor astronomy over the Goddess Pele, but at least phony land ownership claims don’t come into the equation. I can’t think of any other place in the Northern Hemisphere more suited for astronomy than the Hawaiian volcanoes, and there are already numerous observatory facilities located there, so maybe that should take preference and precedence over the religious argument. I believe astronomy trumps goddesses. And I believe human rights trump property rights. But that’s my opinion. I’m not a Conservative.

That’s why I didn’t follow up on your earlier comment. I agree with the Indians. I don’t agree with the Hawaiians, but at least they have a legitimate point. Bundy and his welfare cowboys are just freeloading thugs wrapping themselves up in the flag and the usual phony self-serving free enterprise rhetoric.

Yeah, I know. “Corporations are people too.”

Both case involve involve property rights. In the Bundy case it was about Federal takeover of state lands among other things. Yeah they were armed but didn’t take over the public facility by force. The did it when it was closed.

The pipeline protesters are occupying private land and physically stopping construction. And they use other form of intimidation to hold their ground. The sheer number of them is something to be taken into account. They’re a threat. They don’t say how many there are but if you look at the fact that there have been over 400 arrests since august, it must be in the thousands.

And they’re burning tires. Not much respect for the earth spirit I’d say.

I have no idea how a jury could come to that verdict…