Saturday, November 12, 2005
I can't really comment on the case itself, as I can't trust Indymedia to present the facts, and Tre Arrow's own website is obviously biased. Two points however. Firstly, according to the Indymedia site:
US is seeking a very long prison term in order to use him as an example to anyone considering being an effective activist that disrupts economy.Read that again. What do you think is required In order to be considered an "effective activist"? Rosa Parks was an effective activist. Mahatma Gandhi was an effective activist. Jeff Luers and other Indymedia sympathy cases are criminals. This is from the same group that brought us interesting interpretations of "non violent".
Would these activities be considered the work of "Effective activists"? Would "hurling rocks and paint and using a dead raccoon and animal feces to damage five homes and businesses in four Maine towns" as reported here be considered "effective activism"?
Meanwhile, at Tre Arrow's site
In mid-June 2005, three days of hearings will decide whether Tre will be extradited to the U.S. If the Judge believes that Tre's human rights will be violated, or that he will not receive a fair trial, the Judge has the right to refuse Tre's extradition. However, if the Judge refuses to extradite Tre for humyn (sic) rights violations, it would severely damage US-Canada relations. Therefore, this case is no longer about one man’s rights, but about maintaining the economic relationship with the ‘Super Power’ to our south.I suspect the supporters are over-rating the implications of this case on worldwide justice... Also, what the hell is a "humyn"?
In billions of years even Uranium-235 decays to inert Lead-207, but leftist lunacy is forever.