Comments Japhet has made

Buying carbon credits...

...is a scam. Why do we bother to pay for our pollution with cash when we're paying for it in our environment already? There's no real offsetting going on here...its people making money of pollution, which in a healthy capitalist society encourages more "paid" for pollution.

I admire the motive but not the method. If we want to stop polluting, then STOP POLLUTING. Funny that our justification for so many things that don't make sense in reality is often based around money.  

But Im glad you're at Bonnaroo. Thats gonna Ri-dic-u-lous! Have a time...

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

It's been going on....

...for a long time.

We worked on pressuring funds for the project (through Citigroup) to be diverted. Our campaign against Citi was succussful and they did pull out of the Urubamba but other banks and funders stayed in making it possible for the project to go forward.

Whats hard to imagine is that these types of projects are springin up all over the world. Checkout the world's largest (and most disruptive) natural gas project being installed on the island of Sakhalin where breeding grounds for the last remaining gray whales are severely threatened by drilling and pipeline creation.  Organized and run by Shell Petroleum, its shaping up to be one of the most intensive natural gas sites on the planet. Never a good thing for the local people or eco-system. On Critics say Peru pipeline is an accident waiting to happen posted 3 years, 7 months ago 1 Response

Making Connections

people have to stop thinking of the environment as separate from the business community and our own human endeavors.  Categorizing this small victory (that'll we'll only have to win again a few months down the road) as a landslide victory for environmentalists everywhere is just another way of hyping the Sierra Club masses. yes its good news...for now. But really all that was accomplished today was a fresh towel on a bleeding wound.  

What we should be doing is drawing connections between the benefits of a green, sustainable, organic, eco-friendly (and whatever else you want to call it) economy will do for not only business but also our natural world. Look at the growth in CSR (corporate social responsibilty) and SRI (socially responsible investing) over the last 5 years.  The trends are growing more green but the key is to show that it does actually pay to invest in sustainability.  

RE: birdboys' comments:  I do agree that, on the whole, there is a trend that conservatives aren't about conserving (at least not like the Teddy Roosevelt's of the past -- but he was more populous than neo-con) but I do think the trend is starting to lean the other direction.  Recently, Sam Brownbeck (R-KS) declared that since we are "stewards" of God's green earth we should be caring for  it, not exploiting it.  Couldn't have said it better myself.  Also, there is a strong religious movement (especially coming out of the christian right) that preaches similar doctrines about conserving God's gift (the earth) to mankind.  

Whether you are a believer or not, we all (religious greenies, hippies and scientists) share a common goal of not allowing this natural world go to waste under corporate dominated profit margins and unregulated markets.  However, I don't think I could sit down with them and have a convo about abortion or international policy.  That would only result in a rather intense food fight (which I would win because hippies aren't afraid to get messy).    

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

Ecoterrorism?

i hope we're all not falling for the eco-terrorism trap.  Terrorism has to include an human component--like suicide bombing, al-Quaeda flying planes into buildings, tossing molotov cocktails at riot police.  These actions by the ELF don't exactly compare...if you understand how they were carried out.  From what I understand all actions like these are carefully choreographed to the point of paranoia around safety and danger.  If at any time someone's safety or life is threatened, for even a moment, the whole action is called off.  Thats not terrorism.  Terrorism isn't discriminating. It's blind violence.  This is targeted, planned and specific to make a point and if any life is at any moment threatened its called off.  

However, it is breaking the law and is serious property damage. The odd thing about all this is because of the "eco-terrorism" label the FBI can get more funding from the government (the word "terrorism" in any FBI report obviously attracts LOTS of money and attention) to persecute "eco-terrorists" often giving them much more serious sentences than say, a rapist or sex offender who are outrightly harming people in our communities.

I can't believe enviros are going along with the FBI-created label "eco-terrorist" without seeing the bigger picture: that these actions often bring about great change in society.

If there are any eco-terrorists in this country they aren't the ones wearing Birkenstocks and hemp necklaces; they're wearing corporate nametags like Dow chemical, Chevron, ExxonMobil, and GE.  

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

All good points...

But I feel as you may have missed my point.  
The question is whether it is at all possible to arrive at an exhaustive and objective definition of terrorism and how it ties to the claim of the existence of "eco-terrorism."

For this argument I'll defer to Boaz Ganor who is the Director of the International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism.

"The definition proposed in international courts of law states that terrorism is the intentional use of, or threat to use violence against civilians or against civilian targets, in order to attain political aims. This definition is based on three important elements:

1. The essence of the activity--the use of, or threat to use, violence. According to this definition, an activity that does not involve violence or a threat of violence will not be defined as terrorism (including non-violent protest--strikes, peaceful demonstrations, tax revolts, etc.).
   
2. The aim of the activity is always political--namely, the goal is to attain political objectives; changing the regime, changing the people in power, changing social or economic policies, etc. In the absence of a political aim, the activity in questwill not be defined as terrorism. A violent activity against civilians that has no political aim is, at most, an act of criminal delinquency, a felony, or simply an act of insanity unrelated to terrorism. Some scholars tend to add ideological or religious aims to the list of political aims. The advantage of this definition, however, is that it is as short and exhaustive as possible. The concept of "political aim" is sufficiently broad to include these goals as well. The motivation--whether ideological, religious, or something else--behind the political objective is irrelevant for the purpose of defining terrorism. In this context, the following statement by Duvall and Stohl deserves mention:

'Motives are entirely irrelevant to the concept of political terrorism. Most analysts fail to recognize this and, hence, tend to discuss certain motives as logical or necessary aspects of terrorism. But they are not. At best, they are empirical regularities associated with terrorism. More often they simply confuse analysis.'

 3. The targets of terrorism are civilians. Terrorism is thus distinguished from other types of political violence (guerrilla warfare, civil insurrection, etc.). Terrorism exploits the relative vulnerability of the civilian "underbelly"--the tremendous anxiety, and the intense media reaction evoked by attacks against civilian targets. The proposed definition emphasizes that terrorism is not the result of an accidental injury inflicted on a civilian or a group of civilians who stumbled into an area of violent political activity, but stresses that this is an act purposely directed against civilians. Hence, the term "terrorism" should not be ascribed to collateral damage to civilians used as human shields or to cover military activity or installations, if such damage is incurred in an attack originally aimed against a military target. In this case, the responsibility for civilian casualties is incumbent upon whoever used them as shields."

So as you can see destruction of property does not fall into the definition of terrorism.  It has to be violence directed, indefinitely, at a civilian or towards a person specifically, inflicting harm with political motives. ELF and ALF, though extreme in thier tactics, are not "terrorists" by international standards. However, they have become unfortunate scapegoats for a society hungary to point fingers and slap cuffs on the closest version to it.  

If we are ready to claim the Boston Tea Party as a terrorist event, done by terrorists, then so be it.  But once again, I do believe it is based on perspective: afterall, your terrorists are our freedom fighters, and vice versa.  I will continue to believe that the implications of progress in society will always be revolutionary.

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

As a member of...

Rainforest Action Network, I 'll mention that this type of pressurue is nothing new...however the amount of pressure is.  Lots of interesting little tidbits that I can't share at the moment but hopefully you won't be seeing any of us in front of a Grand Jury in DC anytime soon.

I will say that "terrorism" by definition must have a human compononet and once again, similar to the Red scare under McCarthy, the terminology is being batted around, molded and adjusted to fix various boxes, or situations, that the accuser would like to fill or address.  Terrorism does not include destruction of property. If it did, then this country was founded by terrorists. Afterall, what was the Boston Tea Party but a bunch of "revolutionairies" masquarading as native americans, destroying the property of the East India Tea Company, a rather important company to the British Crown. During all of these "eco-terrorist" events, protests or actions, the primary determining factor is safety and avoiding injuring other human beings.  Its why those tractors were set fire in the middle of the night after all workers had been cleared from the area.  It's why our SUV pal didn't blow up the SUV's during lunch hour.  To label these people the same as we would Osama Bin Laden, at least to me, is a bit of...well a stretch.    

A good friend of mine, who ironically works at the FBI as a lowly tech, explained to me sometime after 9-11 that it seemed anythign labeled "terrorism" in the the planning office received immediate funds to deal with the issue.  It got bad enough that agents began labeling anything that might not normally receieve funding as a "terrorism" claim to ensure financial security.

So are these types of actions non-violent? Yes. Care and safety of all around is always the first priority. If we were terrorists, we wouldn't care about that.  

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

Cat 6

To my knowledge there is no such thing as a category 6 hurricane. Cat5 hurricanes are defined as wind speeds of 155mph and up.  I've also heard that hurricane wind speeds cannot exceed 195mph...something about it being naturally impossible. But who knows, right? With the way the climate is shifting, we should be looking for new natural weather mutations?

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

Nail on the Head

Yup. JD hit the nail on the head.  It's not about being "for" or "against" something as much as its about our inidividual priorities, which, incidentally, effect our collective priorities. Thanks for pointing that out...

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

Grassroots

Good stuff. Glad to see people in this country still do care about activism. One question for Brad and Alicia: Were there others like you out there? Did you meet fellow activists taking to the roads and neighborhoods of America?  

I couldn't agree more with the statement, "It is we the people who breathe life into this government."  Let's hope this ideal is passed down more and more throughout our lifetimes and not less and less.  

Kudos to Brad and Alicia for dropping everthing and making summer less about vacation and more about "what you can do for you country."  

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

Potency Not Frequency

This is a great article and does much to balance the  discussion on how closely related climate change and global warming are to the cause of Katrina.  I agree , in one sense, that neither were THE culprit when it comes to linking the storm to the devastation. Many other things played into the catastrophe, such as the levee upkeep, budget cuts to FEMA and Army Corps of Engineers (who btw, love this stuff and you should check out Mark Reisner's book Cadillac Desert to give a solid, if disturbing, history of the Corps of Engineers and the environment) and of course the slow response of emergency personnel to the situation. I'd throw in leadership but it doesn't seem like anyone, either from the state or federal level really stepped up to "lead" people into action.

However, I do think the article will be taken by global warming questioners as evidence that, yet again, there is disagreement in the ranks and even environmentalists can't come to an agreed-upon explanation for this natural disaster so why should anyone listen to them?

Lastly, in the larger picture global warming absolutely played a role in the overall intensity of this storm.  Yes more levees and better funding and stronger plan of action before such an event would have saved lives and homes, but the intensity of the storm, one of the few category 4 hurricanes to hit the gulf coast, was a direct result of rising ocean temperatures that supercharge slow moving category 2 and 3 storms ramping up along the coast line.  Global warming will not result in more storms overall. You're not going to have 45 hurricanes in the coming season. However, you may very well have 7 hurricanes of which 3 are category 4 or higher.  That means lots of $ when it comes to recovery.  

I posted an interesting study on Floating Ark the other day that some folks may find interesting regarding cyclone activity and its tie-in to global warming.

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

EnviroPerfectionist

It seems that as concerned world citizens, and ones that are partial to the ecological health of the planet and biosphere, we activists are also perfectionists. It sounds like this piece was written to just some skepticism in the fire. I agree that we need to be weary of what we buy and to be vigilant over what is really considered "organic" or "natural" in someone else's definition. At the same time I agree with those above that we should be more encouraging sensible purchases and people who are at least trying to get it right as opposed to filling them with more repudiation.  Kudos to the writer for having the guts to post such a controversial article but even more kudos to those who have flagged it with coherent argument. On When it comes to green products, who's zoomin' who? posted 4 years, 4 months ago 14 Responses

I am a Chump

I have for years been buying, blindly that is, all of the eco friendly food, cleaners, deodorant (which my bestest pals from college will tell you doesn't really work--its kind of like sticking a bar of soap under each arm) and snacks that I could find. I have since "learned some lessons" and now have narrowed my purchasing habits to a select few of brands.  This is not to say that I am ready and willing to be "chumpified" as is so if anyone out there has any good dirt on the following "organic" companies please holla now.

Seventh Generation -- based in VT (my home state) so I eagerly support their work. Their stuff does actually work but am skeptical of their ingriedients.

Garden of Eatin' -- just heard that Kraft or someone bought them out and are no longer on their own.

Patagonia -- no question marks with this company. Right?

Puma -- found out they belong to a signifcant group of corporations who formed a fair-trade coalition (after the Nike sweatshop explosion).

For a really interesting breakdown of organic food companies and who owns who checkout:
http://www.certifiedorganic.bc.ca/rcbtoa/services/corporate-ownership.html
 On When it comes to green products, who's zoomin' who? posted 4 years, 4 months ago 14 Responses

Timing

I think it really depends on the situation. As someone that works for Rainforest Action Network and sees firsthand the tactics that are employed I have to say that everyone has said something that rings true thus far.

The biggest problem with market activism (corporate campaigning) is getting their attention.  You can't just roll into Bank of America headquarters and demand to see their CEO. People will laugh at you. They are powerful, busy people that do not have time for folks like you and me. If they did, there wouldn't be any such thing as corporate campaigning because all our requests would at least be dealt with upon first demand. So you need to get their attention (essentially, show them you mean business and its in THEIR best interest to sit down with you and talk eco-nomics).  The way you do that is hit them where it leaves a mark, a mark that shows them we're not going away until they hear us out.  Often its the size of a mosquito bite, other times its the size of a 2x4.  And, even so they will most definitely ignore you for a good long while. Why do you think most of our campaigns extend into 2 year dedications? Its not because we're taking time off. What gets them to the table is consistent and unwavering pressure.  

That being said, violence is never advocated or instiuted as a method at Rainforest Action Network. We have always and will continue to, focused on changing the world through non-violent direct action.  

I love the above analogy with corporate targets as children and enviros being the parents. If only it was that easy!  I think a more realistic analogy would be the enviros as the 8 year old kid warning their parents to stop cheating on each other before their marriage goes to the birds.

Once we get the attention of these coporations the discussion radically changes from "Us vs. Them" to "How can we work out an agreement/policy that works for both parties involved."  You'd be amazed at how many of our former "targets" have become partners in leading corporate society into an environemntal future.

Great convo here and keep it up folks!On Conflating environmentalists and terrorists is all the rage posted 4 years, 4 months ago 21 Responses

Weak Sauce

I can't think of something much more pathetic than trying to incorporate sustainability on a bombing range. You gotta wonder how sustainable somethign can be when its getting blowed up once a week.

And what the heck are "green munitions?"  Is that like an inordinate exposure to poison ivy or pyschadelic shrooms? "Ahhh look out! They have poison oak! Run away! Run away!"  Sounds like a scene out of Monty Python. Maybe green munitions is just code for biological weapons.

Corey, I loved the imagery of a payload exploding into spotted owls and butterflies. Too funny.

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

Keeping this on the DL

Anyone else worried about GOP politicians using these re-discoveries as a way to repeal pieces of the Endangered Species Acts? Im a little nervous that all of these re-discoveries could hurt us in the end...

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

Delay and Cheney?

Its amazing that during this Delay scandal, that seems to attract reporters like bees to honey, no one is making a hulabaloo about Cheney and his Secret Task Force.  You'd think that hiding facts of this magnitude from the public eye would result in a larger cacophony of media voices. But I guess they're all distracted by other things like Michael Jackson's 5th trial.  

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

Yeehaw

JP Morgan was the target of Rainforest Action Network for over a year.  They worked extensively with the coporation on developing a legit policy when it came to sustainability.  What will be interesting is who RAN targets next in the banking sector.  After bringing the top three banks in the country (CitiGroup, Bank of America and JP Morgan)to the table, any one is game...

:)

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

Bypassing Big Gov't for Reality and G'roots

I def think we have some victories to be proud of, relish and basque in the warmth in. I think the American culture is beginning to make an slight step towards a stronger national environmental policy; one that comes from our communities and not from Washington.  However, I also believe that much of this is due to a tremendous group of dedicated individuals constantly standing watch and sounding the alarm whenever the green lines are breached, whether it be by political, private or business individuals.  What's needed now is a continued effort to push on what works.  The big boys in DC (Sierra Club and WWF) are being stalled and halted at almost every corner.  Perhaps there is a better way to create change?  We think so.  

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

Highway Robbery

From what little research I've done....they never have.  It seems to be a regular DOT mantra to just keep throwing money at the problem.  However, here is an interesting piece about trying to revamp and commercialize the highway system...

http://www.rppi.org/pbrief19.html

And here's another piece that speaks to the possibility of opening up our public highways to private funding.  

http://www.cbo.gov/showdoc.cfm?index=320&sequence=1

However, we should also take into account the profits that we all reap as a result of being able to drive 80 mph in a straight line to get where we need to be or do deliver what is probably late.
This site maps out some of the costs and benefits that come out of the Federal HWY system.

http://www.apta.com/research/info/online/healthy_returns.cfm

Not sure where to go on this one.  The initial question can easily turn into a discussion about HOW the highways are funded as they seem to be the money pit we all continue to chuck money at.  There has to be a better answer, one that takes into account environmental and durability issues.

What did you all find?

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

Another good title

"Bush considers book of fiction for environmental policy."

I dont' care how many authentic sources Crichton sites: its fiction and should be read with the same expectations as his other works of "science fiction" Sphere and Jurassic Park.  Fun to believe, but not to be taken seriously.

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

Santa Fe With Woody

Hey folks, those of you in the New Mexico region may want to come on down to the local Ford adoption site in Santa Fe.  Woody Harrelson, among other speakers, will be there along with his bio-diesel bus-load of activists.  Its gonna be a rockin good time and chance to see what real direct action can do when we tap the right nerve.  Again the goal here is to get each of these dealerships to send a letter or make a phone call to Ford corporate in Detroit showing the real demand for energy-efficient vehicles and that we need Ford to start manufacturing zero-emission cars.  Details for the event in Santa Fe below:

When: Friday April 1st, 2005, 1 - 4 pm
Where: Church Of Religious Science Of Santa Fe
       505 Camino De Los Marquez

Speakers:
Woody Harrelson, Actor and Activist

Scott Pittman--Co-founder of the Permaculture Institute, member of Eco Versity Core-Faculty

Jim Gollin--Chair of Board of Directors, Rainforest Action Network

Marilyn Winter-Tamkin- Chairperson, Earth Care International

BenJaman Remmers - New Mexico Solar Energy Association

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

Diesel?

Can someone speak to the issue of diesel vs. unleaded gas? I've been told by a few folks that the "new" diesel actually burns cleaner than unleaded gas or isn't as harmful to the atmosphere.  I have no idea what the truth is now and I'd love to know where we stand on who's cleaner.  

Bio-diesel is obviously much cleaner, though you might not get the 0-60 in under 8 seconds that everyone seems to love now and again.  However, your exhaust will smell like french fries...now THAT's a tradeoff!  

And has anyone heard about Willie Nelson telling truckers to go biodiesel?

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

Hollywood and EV-1

Good.  A few Hollywood stars have also been busy supporting a electric-vehicle sit-in in Burbank, CA.  Apparently some activists, who actually own GM's EV-1 cars, are protesting GM's recent effort to squish (literally) their entire fleet of EV-1 vehicles.  

The more attention this gets the better.  Who wants to bet the MSM (main-stream media) don't show the stars mentioned above hopping out of their hybrids?  Im thinking its just not as spicy a shot to show folks crawling out of sedans instead of stretch Hummers.  We'll see.

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org

Ahhh....

To steal some already superb quotes...

"Don't blow it--good planets are hard to find."

"I think the environment should be put in the category of our national security.  Defense of our resources is just as important as defense abroad.  Otherwise what is there to defend?"  ~Robert Redford, Yosemite National Park dedication, 1985

And why do Europeans come over here to see OUR national parks? Because they cut their's down and developed the rest of their small continent.  You don't want to do what the French and Germans do, do you? Disregard for the environment is un-American but conservation is part of our heritage.

Jay Els Educate, Motivate and Bring About Change. www.ran.org