Tuesday, June 07, 2005
Politics of Criminals
Milwaukee Indymedia is reporting on the five year anniversary of "political prisoner" Jeff Luers.
What was his political crime?
Bloggers in Iranian prisons are political prisoners. Dissidents in China are political prisoners. Idiots that set fire to things are not political prisoners and calling them as such is an insult to people who genuinely did nothing wrong except think. Sadly, it was the lack of thinking which got him into prison in the first place. Maybe Luers can think about it now (perhaps in the showerblock).
More on this poster-boy for arsonists and criminal 'activists' at his support website, Free Jeff Luers where you can read the pitiful excuses that "no one got hurt" and they "caused only" $40 000 damage. If you can't do the time...
What was his political crime?
Jeff was sentenced to more than 22 years in prison for burning three Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs) at a car dealership in Eugene, Oregon, and on attempted arson charges. Jeff set fire to SUVs to call attention to climate change and to protest oil wars and environmental destruction. Jeff was motivated by compassion and a desire to protect life, not to harm it, despite what some might think of his tacticsHis compassion for the motor vehicle dealer is unending...
Prior to his arrest, Jeff was a popular community activist in Eugene.Popular with what sort of "activist"? Let me guess. The non-violent kind?
On June 12, 2004, social and environmental activists in the US, Canada, England, Scotland, Norway, Finland, Australia, and Russia participated in an "International Day of Action" with Jeff by organizing non-violent protestsExcuse me, why do you need to organize a specifically "non-violent" protest? Is violence assumed unless otherwise stated?
Since the June 12, 2004 Day of Action, support for Jeff has continued to grow and strengthen. People all over the world see Jeff as a political prisoner and acknowledge that his sentence is meant as a deterrent to increased resistance to oppression.Err, no. I think you'll find it's a deterrent to arsonists.
Bloggers in Iranian prisons are political prisoners. Dissidents in China are political prisoners. Idiots that set fire to things are not political prisoners and calling them as such is an insult to people who genuinely did nothing wrong except think. Sadly, it was the lack of thinking which got him into prison in the first place. Maybe Luers can think about it now (perhaps in the showerblock).
During the weekend of June 10-12th, 2005, social justice activists from across the world are called upon again to organize and show their outrage about Jeff’s imprisonment and the continued abuse and isolation of dissident prisoners across the globe.I'm confused about what to wear. Is the "outrage" meant to be violent? Or non-violent? Protest Details include:
A wide range of eco-defense techniques and issues, such as guerrilla gardening, monkeywrenching, Gandhi to guerrilla tactics, gentrification, the importance of direct action, permaculture, the FBI stealing Judi Bari’s fiddle, and more! We will be featuring speeches from inspirational speakers such as Craig Rosebraugh (former ELF spokesperson), Judi Bari, Julia Butterfly, [convicted Cop Killer, inspirational] Mumia Abu-Jamal [presumably given day-release from Death Row to attend and inspire - ed], Derrick Jensen, Alan Watts, Helen Caldicott, Jane Doe, and others.With friends like these...
More on this poster-boy for arsonists and criminal 'activists' at his support website, Free Jeff Luers where you can read the pitiful excuses that "no one got hurt" and they "caused only" $40 000 damage. If you can't do the time...
Comments:
<< Home
I hope you don't let the fact that somebody is stooping low enough to post on this joke of a blog go to your head, but what the hell.
"As a largely unmoderated, unrestricted medium it was promptly over-run by ... Nazis confusing free-speech with hate-speech."
Show me a fascist post on an Indymedia page. I doubt you can. If you can, however, show me a Nazi post that wasn't met with stern resistance from an overwhelming majority of readers.
"His compassion for the motor vehicle dealer is unending..."
Why should someone who's concerned about the ecological well-being of our planet be remotely concerned with someone who's complicit in its destruction?
"Popular with what sort of "activist"? Let me guess. The non-violent kind?"
That's right. He was convicted of non-violent acts against property that no one is entitled to.
"Excuse me, why do you need to organize a specifically "non-violent" protest? Is violence assumed unless otherwise stated?"
Of course violence isn't assumed unless otherwise stated. However, in the incredibly diverse anarchist movement, violence is a gray area. Some believe in violence, and some believe in strict nonviolence. It is appropriate to make a distinction and let people know what kind of event they'll be attending.
"Err, no. I think you'll find it's a deterrent to arsonists."
Potayto potahto.
"Bloggers in Iranian prisons are political prisoners. Dissidents in China are political prisoners. Idiots that set fire to things are not political prisoners and calling them as such is an insult to people who genuinely did nothing wrong except think. Sadly, it was the lack of thinking which got him into prison in the first place. Maybe Luers can think about it now."
I can assure you there's a profound philosophy behind the majority of acts of eco-sabotage, including Mr. Luers'. Feel free to actually educate yourself on the matter. "Burning Rage of a Dying Planet", and "Eco-Defense: A Field Guide to Monkeywrenching" would be good places to start. Otherwise quit regurgitating the ignorance that's already polluted your mind.
I think you're just wrapped up in the stigma of fires and explosions. Tell me, what do you think about the Boston Tea Party? Would you have disapproved if they set fire to the tea instead of dropping it into the sea?
"More on this poster-boy for arsonists and criminal 'activists' at his support website, Free Jeff Luers where you can read the pitiful excuses that "no one got hurt" and they "caused only" $40 000 damage. If you can't do the time..."
No one did get hurt. He merely provided an economic incentive (monetary loss) and a psychological incentive (fire) for a business that's doing harm to our planet to stop. Whether he did 40,000 dollars of damage or 40,000,000 is immaterial. More needs to be done.
And obviously, he can do the time, seeing as he's... doing the time. Every person involved in direct action knows the consequences of what he's doing. Because unfortunately, all too often, what is right does not coincide with what is legal.
Post a Comment
"As a largely unmoderated, unrestricted medium it was promptly over-run by ... Nazis confusing free-speech with hate-speech."
Show me a fascist post on an Indymedia page. I doubt you can. If you can, however, show me a Nazi post that wasn't met with stern resistance from an overwhelming majority of readers.
"His compassion for the motor vehicle dealer is unending..."
Why should someone who's concerned about the ecological well-being of our planet be remotely concerned with someone who's complicit in its destruction?
"Popular with what sort of "activist"? Let me guess. The non-violent kind?"
That's right. He was convicted of non-violent acts against property that no one is entitled to.
"Excuse me, why do you need to organize a specifically "non-violent" protest? Is violence assumed unless otherwise stated?"
Of course violence isn't assumed unless otherwise stated. However, in the incredibly diverse anarchist movement, violence is a gray area. Some believe in violence, and some believe in strict nonviolence. It is appropriate to make a distinction and let people know what kind of event they'll be attending.
"Err, no. I think you'll find it's a deterrent to arsonists."
Potayto potahto.
"Bloggers in Iranian prisons are political prisoners. Dissidents in China are political prisoners. Idiots that set fire to things are not political prisoners and calling them as such is an insult to people who genuinely did nothing wrong except think. Sadly, it was the lack of thinking which got him into prison in the first place. Maybe Luers can think about it now."
I can assure you there's a profound philosophy behind the majority of acts of eco-sabotage, including Mr. Luers'. Feel free to actually educate yourself on the matter. "Burning Rage of a Dying Planet", and "Eco-Defense: A Field Guide to Monkeywrenching" would be good places to start. Otherwise quit regurgitating the ignorance that's already polluted your mind.
I think you're just wrapped up in the stigma of fires and explosions. Tell me, what do you think about the Boston Tea Party? Would you have disapproved if they set fire to the tea instead of dropping it into the sea?
"More on this poster-boy for arsonists and criminal 'activists' at his support website, Free Jeff Luers where you can read the pitiful excuses that "no one got hurt" and they "caused only" $40 000 damage. If you can't do the time..."
No one did get hurt. He merely provided an economic incentive (monetary loss) and a psychological incentive (fire) for a business that's doing harm to our planet to stop. Whether he did 40,000 dollars of damage or 40,000,000 is immaterial. More needs to be done.
And obviously, he can do the time, seeing as he's... doing the time. Every person involved in direct action knows the consequences of what he's doing. Because unfortunately, all too often, what is right does not coincide with what is legal.
Comment Permalink # posted by 
: 5/08/2006 11:28:00 AM
: 5/08/2006 11:28:00 AM << Home
