Pepper Spray - No Big Deal...

Zane z_thomas at ix.netcom.com
Fri Nov 7 00:03:48 EST 1997


On Thu, 06 Nov 1997 20:31:08 -0800, Patrick <patrickl at wco.com> wrote:

>Zane wrote:
>> 
>> On Thu, 06 Nov 1997 14:56:04 -0800, Patrick <patrickl at wco.com> wrote:
>> 
>> >That's not true Kirk. Earth First! is famous for spiking trees to damage
>> >logging equipment, specifically chain saws, and they know full well that
>> >this can and has led to the injury and death of loggers.
>> 
>> Absolute and utter rubbish.  How about posting some references.  Don't
>> have any?  What a surprise, not!
>
>One of my teams assignments in our last mutual aid escapade to Humbolt
>county was to block a road to prevent entry into a logging area where
>spiking had taken place during the last Earth First! demonstration. Now
>just call the Humbolt County Sheriffs Office and asked them about
>spiking of trees by Earth First! They have been using spiking techniques
>for over 10 years. 

Do you guys have a reading comprehension problem, or do you fail to
address points raised out of a malicious disregard for the truth?

You said that trees had been spiked specifically to damage chain saws
and that it has led to injury and death of loggers.  I defy you to
produce evidence to that effect.

>> >The Earth First! Vs. FBI and Oakland PD lawsuit aside, Judy Barri and
>> >her exhusband were injured by a bomb in the back of their car. Of course
>> >Barri claims that loggers put it there and the FBI and Oakland PD
>> >conspired to make it look like the bomb was theirs.
>> 
>> I don't recall Barri claiming that she knew who put the bomb in her
>> car,
>
>Then your memory is faulty. She claimed that logging interest planted
>the bomb in the back of her VW.

Could be, but logging interests is not synonymous with "loggers".

> simply that it wasn't her or the guy who was in the car with her.
>> 
>> Now ask yourself, would you carry a motion-sensitive bomb underneath
>> the seat of a car you were driving?
>
>The device was not motion sensitive. It was a timed device. If it had
>been motion sensitive I might believe her story. 

You _might_ believe it?  And if it was a timed device (I don't see
that it's a terribly relevant point or I'd go look it up) then how
does that make her "story" unbelievable?  Would be rather silly to set
a timer so that it just happened to go off shortly after you got in
your car eh?

Btw, if Barri had _any_ history of bomb-making then we surely would
have heard about it by now.  And, of course, I don't recall that any
of the direct action folks in No. Cal. were ever found to be involved
in bomb-making.

Oddly enough, however, the FBI was giving out lessons about how to
make the very sort of bomb that blew up Barri not long before it
happened.  Of course they were showing how to defuse or handle the
things, but in the process they showed building too.

>> A federal judge has found sufficient cause to allow the lawsuit to go
>> forward.  I suspect the judge is in a better position to evaluate the
>> merits of the suit than you are.  Don't you agree, or do you have
>> facts you'd like to share with us?
>
>I don't care what a Federal judge has ruled, and I want it to go to
>trial because I am anxious to see this case out in the open.

Me too.  I suspect that as in a number of cases where SA Held was
involved all sorts of coerced and fabricated "evidence" will be
discovered.  I can't wait.

>> >I believe the FBI
>> >and Oakland PD version that Barri and exhubbie built the bomb and were
>> >going to use it, until it went off on them.
>> 
>> And why's that?  There's certainly no evidence indicating that that's
>> what happened, which is precisely why the lawsuit is going ahead.
>
>In your words rubbish. A warrant was issued by a Federal Judge to search
>their homes. If there was probable cause to issue the warrant then there
>was evidence, even if circumstantial, that Barri and company built the
>bomb.

Here's a new word for you: bullshit.  If the FBI and the Oakland PD
show up in federal court just after a recent car bombing and tell the
judge they want to search someone's house because of [insert any weak
rationale here] then they'll get the warrant.  They might as well have
a damned rubber stamp for the occasion.

I would think that you would know the difference between probable
cuase and _evidence_, which is what I asked you for.

Zane




More information about the Ag-forst mailing list