Subverting the law to enhance the corporate bottom line is nothing new in our country. But this blog entry outlines a new level of cynicism that appears to be supported by the Commonwealth of Virginia’s legal system: The peaceful protest of a project that will cause harm to the environment is labeled “eco-terrorism” and the protesters are prosecuted as if they are indeed criminals rather than citizens participating in civil disobedience to call attention the that damage. This in-depth look at the extreme tactics companies are willing to take to stamp out dissent is startling and thought provoking. It is a must read.

This is a well researched and insightful analysis that presents the facts of a recent protest and the treatment of the protestors by the government. This is a chilling reminder of what has been happening in our country to people who dare try to stop corporate America from making a profit because they are worried about the long term impacts to human health and the environment. The protestors are labeled eco-terrorists but not the perpetrators of mountain top removal, water shed destruction and air pollution. In California, coal fired power plants are not allowed due to legislation passed. I hope that Virginians can work at passing legislation or vote in elected officials that will care about the legacy of the state. What is ... More »

The blog entry provides the backstory necessary to understand what all the hoopla is about. It also exemplifies a primary tenant of journalism, which is to serve as a government watchdog. And the "dog" takes a metaphorical bite out of the seat of someone's pants by pointing out how far the freedom of speech in America has eroded.

This article uses a small, seemingly innocuous anti-mountain top removal protest as a point from which to examine recent legislation against "domestic terrorism" and "Eco-terrorism". It shows how sit-in trespassers came to be considered dangerous radical extremists. There is considerable examination of the historical evolution of increasingly draconian anti-terrorism law. The irony is pointed out in authorities protecting the corporations exploding mountaintops and polluting rivers but arresting non-violent protesters. I find this article to be useful, informative, well sourced and well-written. It would be enlightening to bring together a wide range of diverse examples from around the nation. I know one peaceful, legal ... More »

This is a well-written description of a particular incident and its possible implications for one area of free speech. While I believe participation in civil disobedience inherently requires the group to expect to be punished (what meaning would the action have if there was no sacrifice involved?), that doesn't mean that it is legitimate to hand down stiff penalties for nonviolent civil disobedience. The blockading probably cost the company money, and our legal system says we as a society are entitled to compensation. I can't imagine that a court would find the actions of this group, as described, to be "eco-terrorism," even by its most recently expanded definition. I hope the ACLU will take up their case, because it seems to be ... More »

Documenting the slippery slope between freedom of speech and "terrorist activities" under the current administration, Wellington uses a specific protest action to show how new laws and definitions could further erode civil liberties. As a California Democratic political activist, I have to say Jane Harmon is widely regarded as an idiot. Even by fellow California representative Nancy Pelosi, who passed her over for chair of the House committee on which Harmon was the ranking Democrat, appears to share this low opinion. The lHarmon aw Beth quotes here sort of shows why.

This is a superb analysis of the under-reported civic struggles in Appalachian coalfields over the radical form of stripmining that is creating almost abiotic landscapes--in a region that has major headwaters and some of the highest biodiversity of any temperate region in the world. It is important because this story is under-reported yet relates to acute national issues of climate change (since coal is the dirtiest fossil fuel for greenhouse gases) and social justice (since the region has suffered unequally from the externalities of fossil fuel era). But, it also does an excellent job of looking over current laws & cultural definitions of 'terrorism'--and of placing these in light of our national history. It's important that we ... More »

These people don't like coal or coal plants and they chose illegal means to protest. The democratically elected governments disagree with them. What's the problem if they are punished for civil disobedience?

Where to start? Tendentious? Yup. AMFO- the same chemicals as are used in car bombs? Yes, it's the same chemical. And - horrors - it's probably in the food you eat on account of the demonic pact between big pharma, big oil, and big food. Blowing the tops off mountains near Wise Va? Yup. They have lots of mountaintops in Wise and not many jobs. Most of the folks would make the trade. The writer needs to spend some time in that environment. Try to make enough to send your kids to school, and to have decent jobs for them to come back to. Get a life.

Just because an act is illegal does not mean it isn't justified. A better word to use than illegal is unauthorized. When it comes down to it, destroying ecosystems and Appalachian culture should be illegal. Unfortunately, we have no way to represent the value of those things in our legal system. Think twice before you judge an act of civic conscious based upon it's legality. You might just find out you have a sense of understanding for what these brave people have done and what they have risked based on their own sense of virtue.