|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
red dog
Joined: 31 Oct 2004
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 8:34 pm Post subject: Does "ecoterrorism" exist? |
 |
|
Sorry, I'm in a hurry so I know I'm rambling a bit here ...
Regardless of whether one approves of this type of action, I think we all have to admit that this is a very informative article and one that sheds light on a very disturbing situation. Look at the heavy-handed way the state has trampled all over Jeff Luers' rights. I also find it kind of depressing that a person as intelligent and principled as Luers is in jail (especially in light of the attitudes that prevail in the free population).
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2005/06/22/gree.DTL
I don't know if this particular action accomplished anything or not. But I really have to admire Jeff Luers' determination, and his refusal to back down even in the face of such a long prison sentence. This story really reinforces my dislike of big business and the "authorities" who decided to label this guy a terrorist.
I'm very tired today. It would be great to know what others think. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
wannago
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 9:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't feel one bit sorry for this guy and it really has nothing to do with his environmental stance. It has everything to do with doing the time for committing the crime. Once you commit a criminal act you throw yourself at the mercy of the courts and this guy got spanked real hard. It's obvious this dude has at least some intelligence but you can't expect the courts to look the other way just because he feels so strongly about his issues. These are the same kinds of people that put metal spikes in trees so workers with chainsaws are injured and sometimes killed. There are better ways to serve your cause. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
red dog
Joined: 31 Oct 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2005 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I see your point, and part of the reason this guy comes across as a somewhat heroic figure to me is his willingness to go to jail and face the consequences of his actions -- even though the sentence (IMO) was unbelievably heavy-handed.
Also, it's clear that he's being targeted because of his beliefs, as shown by the case of the non-politically motivated arsonist who got a lighter sentence even though his actions endangered people and Luers' didn't. Plus I don't think anyone had any legitimate authority to prevent him from writing or speaking out in the media.
Here's another, even more outrageous story illustrating the insanity of so-called "ecoterrorist" legislation (in this case involving a different country):
http://www.insnet.org/ins_headlines.rxml?cust=2&id=1243 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2005 1:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Do you consider yourself an anarchist now?
Yeah, but probably not in the way that most people define anarchist. I believe in autonomous self-rule. My definition of anarchy includes the ability of other people to choose to live nonanarchist lifestyles. I think that people need to choose the lifestyle that's best for them, as long as it doesn't impinge on the freedom of others.
|
Anyone else see any irony in the bold face statement?
His distinction that his crime didn't present a threat to other people: Light 3 cars on fire that could explode...That doesn't create a dangerous situation for other people? Hmmmmm.
I don't see anything excessive in his sentence. Maybe in 20 years he'll cool off a little. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rapier
Joined: 16 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 3:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Maybe in 20 years he'll cool off a little. |
Doubt it, we'll be frying in an out-of control greenhouse effect by then.
There should be more eco terrorism.
The only eco terrorism happening now is the traumatic wholesale destruction of all other living things on the planet for short term human profit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 5:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rapier wrote: |
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Maybe in 20 years he'll cool off a little. |
Doubt it, we'll be frying in an out-of control greenhouse effect by then.
There should be more eco terrorism.
The only eco terrorism happening now is the traumatic wholesale destruction of all other living things on the planet for short term human profit. |
I don't agree. I'm extremist on the other end. I think if the human species cannot get wise enough fast enough and communicate what is necessary to know to one another in the time we have left, then we don't deserve to survive.
The planet will go on. Nothing I've read about global warming - as distinct from what we know of, for instance, nuclear winter - indicates that it means the death of all life on the planet. But I can't condone the actions of ecology-minded terrorists just because they are committed to it, and strongly believe they are right, any more than I can condone beheading in Iraq or suicide bombing where misguided and desperate idealists choose such means.
Part of me understands it. But I just don't agree with it. Sorry to be so blunt, but I don't consider and car bomb to be a free speech act, even if no one was inside the car at the time. It just reminds me too much of the IRA and their exploding cars - no one, no matter how liberal, thought for a moment to put that under the umbrella of the First Amendment.
The real solution, if it happens, is education and persuasion, not intimidation, and the tragedy is that violence like this tends to push people in the other direction, rather than the one required for understanding and collective action.
And if that never happens, we have to admit that our species was not fit to exist on this planet. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nowhere Man
Joined: 08 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 6:11 am Post subject: ... |
|
|
I've known about him for quite a while now. For someone who wasn't trying to and didn't kill anyone, that sentence is RIDICULOUS.
Do a google of manslaughter, and here's an example:
http://www.va.gov/oig/51/press99/wood-pr.htm
THIS MAN KILLED SOMEONE.
Sentence: 5 months' imprisonment, 36 months' probation, and a $25,000 fine.
Kill an SUV in a showroom?
20 YEARS?
Bullcrap.
Bullcrap.
Bullcrap into infinity.
The president is more guilty of murder than he will ever be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 7:32 am Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| The president is more guilty of murder than he will ever be. |
Haha, well, I've got opinions about that, too.
Rummy, Condi and Dubya, all next to Milosevich in the Hague with them, one and all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wannago
Joined: 16 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 11:10 am Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
Kill an SUV in a showroom?
20 YEARS?
Bullcrap.
Bullcrap.
Bullcrap into infinity.
The president is more guilty of murder than he will ever be. |
Ah yes, drag the President into the discussion. That will make this freak's actions much better! That damn Bush! He's responsible for this guy being put into prison!
Look, if you are gonna commit the crime you should be smart enough to know that you can get the maximum penalty no matter how you "feel" about it. Aren't we fortunate your "feelings" don't mean a thing in something like this? I don't "feel" sorry for him. Not one damn bit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rapier
Joined: 16 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 7:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
By the standards of Bush's America, a committed ecoterrorist who demolishes an SUV is more of a threat than your average murderer.
nothing can be allowed to bring looming environmental disaster to the top of the agenda- too much of a threat to the economy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
red dog
Joined: 31 Oct 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 27, 2005 11:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was half asleep when I posted these messages earlier and my energy levels still aren��t great. But I think both Rapier and Nowhere Man made good points -- that many killers receive lighter sentences, and this guy got exceptionally harsh treatment because he threatens the economic interests of the wealthy. I don��t think he feels sorry for himself, but the point is that we should all be concerned about this situation.
I actually have very mixed feelings about this sort of action and don��t really know whether it��s effective or not. But by no stretch of the imagination is it comparable to what the IRA and al-Qaida do -- this guy destroyed empty vehicles, and I��m sure he took precautions to make sure no one would get hurt. I don��t necessarily think Bush deserves to be called a ��terrorist,�� but he and most of the others in power are certainly far worse criminals than the ELF and the ALF.
I have more to say, but it will have to wait ... Later ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 4:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
rapier and Nowhere Man,
Your analysis and my analysis of this situation differ. Therefore you must be made to suffer. I'm sorry, but that is not your decision. It is mine.
Please e-mail me your address and work schedule. This information will be used to plan the fire bombing of your apartments. I don't want to harm any people, so please be accurate. IF any people suffer physical harm, the responsibility is on your head, the blood on your hands, because I am only exercising my right to protest your views. You need not worry. I'm sure your insurance companies will cover your loses.
After consideration, red dog must also be included in the hits since he is undecided. In my opinion, you are either with me or against me. So he is condemned by his own indecision.
Thank you and have a nice day,
Your friendly and considerate anti-ecology terrorist |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Bobster
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 8:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
rapier and Nowhere Man,
Your analysis and my analysis of this situation differ. Therefore you must be made to suffer. I'm sorry, but that is not your decision. It is mine.
|
Though he doesn't know it, and might not like it, I've been a fan of Ya-ta Boy for quite while now. This kind of thing is one reason why.
I'm a fan fan of Bucheon Bum and Kuros, too, just to be clear ... wish I knew where kanganmdragon went ... don't agree with any of them but glad to have them around.
Sorry to get back on topic, but the point is that if you give someone the power they will silence and eliminate ANYone who disagrees ... that's part of WHY they wanted the power, you know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 1:54 pm Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
| The Bobster wrote: |
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
| The president is more guilty of murder than he will ever be. |
Haha, well, I've got opinions about that, too.
Rummy, Condi and Dubya, all next to Milosevich in the Hague with them, one and all. |
but their actions saved many more lives than were lost.
And the stategic situation in the mideast was a threat to the US.
If the Bathists , the followers of Khomeni and the followers of Bin Laden don't want to give up their war then they US is justified in doing anything to force them to.
Those kind of political entities are the reason for the terror because it is their nature to teach hate and incite violence. They are illegitimate and they have no right to exist. And when the US targets them all the US is doing is praciticing self defense cause those political entities refuse to give up their war. The US has nothing to apologize for when it goes after them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
desultude
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
Location: Dangling my toes in the Persian Gulf
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 28, 2005 5:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rapier wrote: |
By the standards of Bush's America, a committed ecoterrorist who demolishes an SUV is more of a threat than your average murderer.
nothing can be allowed to bring looming environmental disaster to the top of the agenda- too much of a threat to the economy. |
And nothing can be allowed to threaten corporate profits. Unfortunately, NOW people are starting to see the truth about SUV's- but it is high gas prices, not environment damage, that is making people see the light.
As an aside, we all bitch at times about how collectivist and group minded Koreans are, but Americans are the polar opposite- individualist and self-interested to the max- and it is not a pretty thing.
| Quote: |
More Clean Vehicles as SUV Sales Slow June 28 2005
A new study from Kelley Blue Book reveals the number of Americans thinking of buying a gas-guzzling sports utility vehicle (SUV) is rapidly declining, mainly thanks to the high price of fuel. Meanwhile, the number of vehicles powered by hybrid electric or clean diesel engines is set to more than double, according to J D Power and Associates.
Kelley��s New-Vehicle Buyer Attitude Study on SUVs found that only 34% of vehicle shoppers are considering an SUV – the lowest level in the three years of the study. Last year, shoppers' main reason for not considering an SUV was that it was not the type of vehicle they were interested in. This year, the main reason (up 8 points to 61%) is the escalation of gas prices, while 37% cite US dependence on foreign oil as a major reason. ��Manufacturers will have to reconcile themselves to the fact that American consumers seem less enamored of big SUVs than at any time in memory,�� according to Jack Nerad, Editorial Director for Kelley Blue Book.
So what will Americans drive instead? J D Power predicts that that vehicles with hybrid electric engines, which accounted for just 0.5% of the market in 2004, will increase their share to 3.5% by 2012, while diesels will grow from 3% to 7.5%. ��Higher gas prices are acting as a catalyst for automakers and consumers to find alternatives to the traditional gasoline internal combustion engine,�� said Anthony Pratt, Senior Manager of Global Powertrain Forecasting at J D Power. ��Outside of meeting future emissions standards, the biggest challenge for automakers will be convincing consumers that today��s diesel engines have increased performance and run cleaner and quieter than previous-generation diesels,�� said Pratt. He also stated that manufacturers would have to reduce the price of alternative vehicles in order to attract customers.
The New-Vehicle Buyer Attitude Study on SUVs was administered on Kelley Blue Book's web site, www.kbb.com
J D Power and Associates is online at www.jdpower.com |
http://www.mrweb.com/drno/news4220.htm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
