Then you are against these protesters.I do not support destruction of property as a form of civil disobedience. It should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.
Originally Posted by johnny_rebson:
These are the same liberals who forgot how Iraq attacked us on 9/11.
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"
Cicero Marcus Tullius
Whaling is not wrong.
Whaling to the point of driving a species extinct is not wise.
Last edited by surrealistpenguin; 01-07-10 at 12:45 PM.
YesChaining yourself to property?
I am in favor, for instance, of the tactics that were utilized by civil rights protesters during the 1960s...lunch counter sit-ins, bus boycotts, refusing to move, and marches.
No. However, the term "intimidation" is subjective. I am not in favor, for instance, of the limits that have been put in place specifically on abortion protesters, because of the argument that their presence was "intimidating" to patients. I consider that bollocks.Intimidation?
So the Sea Shepherd pirates finally get the collision they've been trying to cause for years now.
They should be sued for interfering with the lawful activities of a vessel.