Thanks for Commenting
Heinrich has also acknowledged accepting money from Susan Morgan, another co-founder of EarthFirst. He did so in response to my column in February in the Alibi, entitled "The Heinrich Maneuver." At the end of the first video, when the crowd is chanting, I think there's a shot of Todd Schulke, another EarthFirster from whom Heinrich has accepted money. Schulke has spoken warmly of Rodney Coronado, a convicted arsonist.
Many people (like me, once) who care about the environment unknowingly rub up against people who practiced eco-terrorism. A lot of this is accepted in the environmental movement. That's a sad fact. Heinrich is running for Congress, where he could vote and sit on committees dealing with terrorism and law enforcement. He knows who these people are. I cannot understand where his head is, except that maybe he's not that opposed to eco-terrorism.
Mario, I got attacked pretty viciously for simply mentioning what are indisputable facts. Best wishes to you.
So a candidate is responsible for everything their contributors (and their associates) have ever said or done? Wow!
Meanwhile... Darren White is still a firm Bush supporting Neocon wackjob who thinks that drilling for the US's hilariously small oil reserves is the answer to the energy crisis and isn't able to connect the dots between the disastrous and illegal invasion of Iraq and the destabilization of the the oil market.
"Heinrich Accepts Money From Abortion Clinic Bombers!" "Heinrich Accpets Money From Black Church Arsonists!" "Heinrich Accepts Money From Anti-Immigrant Vigilantes!" If those were the headlines, many of his supporters would run from him. But "eco-terrorism" is the liberals' terrorism of choice. They call it "monkeywrenching" to make it sound romantic, literary. Many liberals don't even consider destroying property, machinery, farm improvements, etc., and inciting fear and apprehension in farmers, construction crews, office workers, small business owners, mill workers, etc. to be "terrorism." I think that's why Heinrich has continued to accept contributions from people he knows have practiced and/or advocated the use of terror in pursuit of radical, "biocentric" environmentalist agendas. I note that he accepted even more EarthFirst money after my article came out in Feb. raising alarms about EarthFirst contirbutions he had already accepted, and predicting what the GOP was going to do with those facts. What does that tell you? I think it means he's just not that bothered by eco-terrorism.
Yes Jim, we know you've returned to your wackjob GOP roots. You're even back to using the GOP talking points and codephrases again.
Clearly since Pearce & White take money from the oil industry, we can conclude that they approve of the Exxon Valdez spill, and of the House of Saud and all their repression of the Saudi people, and of the Mullahs that run Iran, and of Enron's fraud. Your logic is impeccable as usual.
I love how you pretend to be a civil rights attorney while simultaneously arguing in favor of guilt by association Jim. You're a real mensch.
See, the point of the cliche is that the forest *is* the trees. I never thought I'd run into someone stupid or blinded by partisanship enough that I'd have to actually explain it to them.
Dan: Would you support someone who took money from and spent over a decade in close association with with people who bombed abortion clinics, burned black churches or destroyed the property of Mexican immigrants? If no, then why do you support someone who has knowingly associated with (taken money from, partied with, worked with) people who employed violence and intimidation to further their environmentalist agenda? Please, just try answering the questions and hold the ad hominen attacks for a minute, if you can.
Define "close association."
Would you support someone who took money from someone who had a close association with dictators whose oppressive policies lead to the September 11 attacks? Why do you hate America Jim? Why do you support the murder of New Yorkers?
Your attempt at guilt by association does not fly. I don't understand why you're even going down this low, low road. You're a lawyer, I assume you have some training in logic. Guilt by Association is a classical logical fallacy. Its used in political campaigns because it works - because if people like you scream that Heinrich taking donations from people who are "associated" with ecoterrorists enough times, people with weak minds will start to believe that somehow this means Heinrich supports ecoterrorism.
So to answer your question, yes, I would support someone who took money from someone else who "...spent over a decade in close association..." with various forms of terrorism if the candidate in question had better policies than his opponent. That's because I don't believe in smear campaigns. Unfortunately for the Republic, that's all the GOP *does* believe in.
Mario, you and Jim Scarantino are so wrong your ridiculous allegations about Martin Heinrich being involved with Earth First! I was part of Earth First! from 1985 through 2006. I moved to New Mexico in 1989. Heinrich was never a part of Earth First! I never saw him at a meeting, at a rally or at a protest. He's a good looking guy, I'd have remembered. In fact, Heinrich doesn't have the temperament to be an Earth First!er. He's calm, patient, fair and willing to listen to all sides. He believes in mediation and compromise. He makes a good public servant, but a really bad radical environmentalist. So what if the great American heroes Dave Foreman or Susan Morgan have given him contributions. I bet some of White's contributers have interesting pasts too. Mario- you've been seriously duped into making yourself look stupid. Don't take advice from Scarantino about Earth First! He's got a kneejerk emotional attitude that can't see the truth for the anger.
So am I somehow a terrorism supporter? I don't feel like one. I don't condone violence against anyone. But I have donated to Martin's election. I'm one of Dave's friends. I know him personally and for many years. Linking the destruction of machinery to terrorism (which immediately makes people think of 911) is disgusting politics.
Killing a bulldozer is not terrorism by any definition used today. Yeah it's a crime. No, I don't recommend it. But take it from someone who actually knows the people you are talking about VERY well - you are ridiculously off the mark.
Love your videos from decades ago. Dave is a senior citizen now. No one mentioned that above. 99% of the things he was involved in were nothing more than peaceful protests. You want to take that right away from the land of the free?
Nah - you don't care. You just thought you had a story. You don't. Next.
Commenting by HaloScan
