EF! Fined $1million in Idaho

David Whitt davwhitt at med.unc.edu
Wed Nov 13 22:30:28 EST 1996

In article <3289ADC0.5490 at homenet.ie>, J Zeigler  <microz at homenet.ie> wrote:
>David Whitt wrote:
>> The Nazis murdered millions of people.  I fail to see your connection
>> between their actions and those of EF!
>The point was that the Nazi's actually had a minority in Germany, but
>through the use of terrorism cowed the rest of the populace. Very
>similar to what the EF!'s were trying to do to the timber company and
>through that example, to the rest of us. You brought it up, I didn't.

The timber industry is not the majority of the US.  Most Americans seem
very much for the environment.  The problem is most are not aware of the
impact industry has had and how bad things really are.

>>  As for the jury, just because a
>> jury decides on a case, that doesn't mean they made the right decision.
>> They are not fool-proof nor hardly perfect.
>No, but the alternative, if its what you seem to be suggesting, I want
>no part of.

I offer no alternative but I did want to note that a jury's decision does
not decide the morality of an issue.  The Jury is the best way so far to
decide justice, but I wanted to point out its flaws since you were using
it to back up your arguement.

>> The child is the one who does not think for himself but looks to others
>> for guidance.  Whether that other is a jury or politician makes no
>> difference.  We all have to make decisions.  That is a part of life and a
>> part of growing up.  Once you begin, I'm sure you will realize this fact.
>Haven't had any children yet have you Dave? Haven't taken any child
>psychology yet either obviously! Ever seen a kid have a tantrum because
>it wasn't done their way. 

I take it you are oblivious to my sig.  I am gay so I doubt I will have
any children.  As for the psychology, no I have not taken child psychology
but yes I have taken psychology.  If you are implying that my opposition
to you in this debate is the equivalent to a child's temper tantrum, you
are being hypocritical.  I have had enough psychology to know that the
final stage of mental development is when you think for yourself and your
morals and values are those you have thought through, not handed to you on
a platter by a preacher or politician.  That stage is yet to come for you.

>Once you grow up enough to 'really' start thinking for yourself and
>recognizing that living involves tradeoffs (like having to take classes
>to get ahead and work 40 hours a week instead of actively protesting, oh
>I forgot, your doing all that) then maybe you'll modify these stupid
>stances your taking. 

Living does involve compromise, but when you are talking about trading off
your planet for eons for the sake of feeding a glutonous society addicted
to rampant consumerism for a few decades, I feel obligated to take a
stand.  I do not feel my stance to be "stupid" and most people are not
blind enough to not see that the environment is endangered.  The problem
as I see it is most people are not knowledgable enough of the problems
(much like the S&L crisis before it hit the fan and the social security
crisis coming up).  If people really knew how bad it was, they would be up
in arms.

      ****                   David Whitt     davwhitt at med.unc.edu
     ** ***
         **                  No one can make you feel inferior
         ***                 without your consent.
         ****                                 -Eleanor Roosevelt
        ***  *
       ***   **   *          People often find it easier to be a result
      ***    ******          of the past than a cause of the future.
     ***       ***

More information about the Ag-forst mailing list