« You always hurt the ones you love. | Main | Zombies Chew Tinfoil... »

November 14, 2003

Comments

It's the kind of thing that gives independent moderates who think Greenpeace is flaky nervous - hacks 'em off.

Crass stupidity.

Congrats on the blog. Doof post

Selective prosecution to inhibit Free Speech, I'm surprised Ashcroft didn't use RICO on Green Peace.

How's that "free speech"??? They are clearly trespassing on to a ship at sea. If I break into your house to talk to you and you call the cops on me, are you denying me of my right to express myself?

Katherine has a blog! Let there be champagne and cheers.

Stan, my man, with an attitude like that you don't belong in America - you ought to go live in Saudi Arabia where they know how to treat demonstrators. *g* I never thought I'd get the chance to say this to anyone, but, Stan: America - love it or leave it.

Jes, obviously you have no leg to stand on, cause you haven't even replied to what I've said.
Demonstrating is one thing - trespassing is another.
Were they not trespassing?

Jes, while we are at it...
Isn't there some kind of a law saying that pro-lifers have to keep a certain distance from abortion clinics when protesting?
They are not even trespassing and yet they have to keep distance... Hmm.... How come there is no outcry over that law?

I'm not objecting at all to the arrest; it's the prosecution of Greenpeace as an organization under this obscure law.

Katherine,

Trespassing is a crime. Trespassing at sea is piracy, no? As for "Selective Prosecution", I am more interested in the, ironically, selective outcry. I already mentioned the abortion clinic scenario. No outcry over loss of free speech there... The selectivity is ironic, no?

I think it might be selective, if the DOJ were prosecuting pro-life groups instead of their individual members in cases of abortion clinic trespasses... but unless you've got reports of that occuring, I think the reason that it's coming off as selective is because Katherine is talking about a different issue.

Masterchef,

According to Greenpeace:

"We use research, lobbying, and quiet diplomacy to pursue our goals, as well as high-profile, non-violent conflict to raise the level and quality of public debate." (http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/aboutus/)


As you see "non-violent conflict" , in this case: trespassing, is the *official* policy of that organization. Hence, they are getting prosecuted.

Ooops. That link should be http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/aboutus/

A few other things on those abortion laws, in addition to the fact that AFAIK anti-abortion groups and churches are not being prosecuted (only the individual protestors) or threatened with revocation of their non-profit status:

1) They are usually passed at the state level, not by the DOJ.
2) They are passed by the legislature, not by an executive appointee. So selective prosecution is not the issue; badly written legislation may be.
3) They were passed in response to physical threats and intimidation which I don't believe Greenpeace engaged in.
4) Again, Greenpeace is not being prosecuted for trespass by a local government or sued by the company that owns the ship; they're being prosecuted by the United States of America under an obscure 19th century law that hasn't been used for over 100 years.

I think the full article explains this pretty well, but I thought I'd try one more clarification and leave it at that.

I thought it was stupid at first glance too. Then I wondered how I would feel if some ELFholes boarded my SUV to educate me on the benefits of driving a Toyota. I'm not saying to keel-haul the wankers for a first offence, but a reminder to respect other peoples property is a good start.

Katherine,

Again, Greenpeace is not being prosecuted for trespass by a local government or sued by the company that owns the ship; they're being prosecuted by the United States of America under an obscure 19th century law that hasn't been used for over 100 years.

I understand. However, to make your point you would need to provide us with a case where an organization's members repeatedly boarded a ship at sea and the group was not charged under this or another similar law.
If the shoe fits...

The comments to this entry are closed.

Blog powered by Typepad