From: dyrda@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Richard Dyrda)
Subject: Re: Notch another one up for the Greennazis
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 21:05:35 GMT

>In article <56456@dime.cs.umass.edu> yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov17.160248.23062@gn.ecn.purdue.edu> dyrda@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Richard Dyrda) writes:
>> I never said I agreed with the French government. All I said was one
>>day Greenpeace may learn the difference between fishing trollers and
>>Missile Cruisers.
>
>I believe that if they did not know the difference already,they might
>have learned it after the French government showed that it was willing
>to murder unarmed protesters.

 No I think they do not know the difference, otherwise they wouldn't
have been that dumb to try and stop/trail this vessel. Same tactics
apply in carrier air groups who project out a 100 or so mile air
radius as theirs as do in this type of situation. However Greenpeace
does have a right to protest, I never said they didn't.

>> Cmon! Greenpeace totally preys in on the big nations because they know
>>they can not risk any sort of bad publicity. Greenpeace, or some other
>
>This statement is, surprise, counter-factual. The French government
>certainly showed that it was willing to risk bad publicity when it
>sent a terrorist team to bomb the Greenpeace boat and then again when
>it used strong arm tactics and lies to get its terrorists out of
>New Zealand's jails. 

 I think it was supposed to be a quiet incident not a public incident. 
But then again this is the French government, not ours. However I
think French industrialists may view Greenpeace as "terrorists".

>Well, that's because we have a semi-democracy where the right to peaceful
>protest is still preserved. Got a problem with this?

 Never said I did. I believe in the constitution, however in international
waters and other lands that document means didly squat. Greenpeace has
a right to protest, one they exercise regularly, however there methods
can be called into question.

>Pathetic. Is it your contention that the Japanese rammed a Greenpeace
>boat to get revenge for the actions of another environmental organization?

 If you remember the original post this was a joke!
And no the Japanese Destroyer rammed the Greenpeace vessel because it entered
their safety radius. I'm sure that the Japanese/French escorts warned this
vessel numerous times before action was taken, if not then it is a 
crime that should be prosecuted against them.

>Sure. Many people recognize a difference between the actions of the armed
>forces of a nation and the actions of unarmed non-violent citizens groups.

 Sure they do. They also know extremeism when they see it.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Richard Dyrda                         |  "I'm your ice cream man stop
School of Nuclear Engineering         |   when I'm passing by!! They say
Idaho National Engineering Laboratory |   all my flavors are guaranteed 
c/o Purdue University                 |   to satisy!!" Van Halen 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: sci.energy