Will Environmentalism Now Be Terrorism?

[RestoreGore]

Ladies and gentleman, this is a VERY slippery slope we are on. Eco terrorists, or those who defile property and break the law should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. However, I see this case as a bad precedent that will seek to broaden the definition of an eco terrorist to someone who simply stands outside with a sign protesting Bush's policy on global warming.

They must be getting afraid that more people are questioning their policies and standing up to companies that continue to defile this planet so they are looking to put the bosh on it. This simply cannot be allowed. We as American citizens have every right under our Constitution to stand with a protest sign or to air our grievances with our government regarding their lack of stewardship towards this planet and work to change that policy.

This directly goes back to the premise of Al Gore's new book, The Assault on Reason and environmental democracy and our right to protest the policies of this government when we believe they are detrimental to all species and our planet. To make the definition of an eco terrorist so vague as to try to stifle dissent on this issue would be nothing short of fascism.

We need to watch how this unfolds very carefully. Will I eventually be considered a terrorist in this country for wanting to plant trees? For protesting for carbon caps? For supporting Al Gore 's environmental work? We need to stop this now before it goes too far.
~~~~~~~~
http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20070518/ts_csm/aecoterrorism

'Ecoterrorism' case stirs debate in US
By Brad Knickerbocker, Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
Fri May 18, 4:00 AM ET

Ashland, Ore. - When law-enforcement agencies arrested 10 animal rights activists and environmental radicals 18 months ago, it was a major breakthrough in the fight against what officials call "ecoterrorism."

Among the crimes solved were a string of arsons and other attacks across five Western states totaling more than $40 million in damage. Targets of the group calling itself The Family had been timber companies, meatpacking plants, an SUV dealership, a Colorado ski resort, and the University of Washington Horticultural Center.

Now, with all defendants having pleaded guilty because of the weight of the evidence against them, including an informant who wore a recording device, prosecutors are seeking "terrorism enhancements" to their sentences.

"This is the first time in the history of the US that the federal government is seeking this enhancement for property crimes that did not result in injury or death to humans," said Lauren Regan of the Civil Liberties Defense Center in Eugene, Ore.

In their 148-page sentencing memorandum filed last week in federal court in Eugene, prosecutors argued that "although the government was not a direct victim, it was nonetheless a federal crime of terrorism because of the offenders' motivation." Intimidation, coercion, and retaliation aimed at the conduct of government, prosecutors said, deserves "enhanced" punishment under federal antiterrorism laws.

snip

Mainstream environmentalists and animal-welfare advocates decry such violence. But they're concerned that branding it as "terrorism" threatens legitimate activism as well.

"When everyone is a terrorist, no one is," says Ms. Regan. "The further we broaden the language of what a true terrorist is, the less security we really have. If a monkeywrencher is the same as Osama bin Laden, where is the distinction drawn?"

End of excerpt

[Orsino]

1. Probably.

The business of America is business, so if environmentalism is in conflict with corproate interests, it is therefore anti-American.

It's the money. It always comes back to the money, the easy corporate money Congress won't give up.

[RestoreGore]

5. Well, Congress better speak up about this

because there is no way in hell I am going to stop being an environmentalist and speaking up for this planet.

[Orsino]

6. Until the corporate money is actually outlawed...

...or sufficiently demonized in the press, they'll still be competing to see how fast they can acquire it. We have to shame them, and shame them into a ban.

[RestoreGore]

8. Oh well, then I guess we're screwed.

Since the press is owned by those corporations.

[Nikki Stone1]

2. Notice how violent right wingers are not called "terrorists" when they destroy life and limb

But environmentalists and war protesters are considered as such

[RestoreGore]

4. Yes, to them blowing up an abortion clinic is doing "God's work"

[tanyev]

3. Cheney's argument in the Wilson case seems to be that all of their

actions were justified because "Mr. Wilson was criticizing government policy".

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x911219

[RestoreGore]

7. Where is the outrage?

I really have the feeling they could declare anyone who protests the government's environmental policies a terrorist and there would be little to no outrage. I'm calling my Senators about this because I think they will absolutely use this trial as a precedent to expand on anti-terrorism laws to include people who are peacefully protesting envionmental policy and that again is downright fascist. Not that calling my Senators will have any effect more than likely, but this does concern me because it is done so quietly and with such stealth. It is insidious to me.

[flvegan]

9. Have you read the Animal Enterprise TERRORISM Act?

Directly relates civil disobedience against corporations to terrorism.

Check it out:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=s109-3880

[RestoreGore]

10. I heard about it

But will definitely read the link. Thanks. Scary...especially since most people don't know about it.