[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: ATSDR Child-Health Materials via Duke's What's New Page

  What Greenpeace did was necessary
  because it was the only way that the
  samples were ever going to be gotten.
  Just my opinion...
  When people and the environment are
  being poisoned, there is a "higher law"
  that governs our behavior, and it does not
  necessarily need to be announced in
  advance or, in some cases, ever made
  public. I do not encourage people
  purposely and wantonly breaking laws.
  But there are times when higher
  laws take precedence.
  Consider, for instance, that
  there are now laws in about
  13 states which make it illegal
  for a company employee to
  reveal that his/her company
  is poisoning people if that
  company has "self-reported"
  the activity. Some of these
  laws make a whistleblower
  liable for any fines or lawsuits
  that a company might face
  as a result of the media
  exposure. I would absolutely
  support a whistleblower secretly
  revealing the pollution, even though
  he/she is breaking the law.
  Consider the case of one of Dr. Bill's member
  firms that "arranged" with the EPA
  administrator to keep confidential the effects of 2,4,5-T
         in the Alsea Basin. Someone broke a
  law and leaked the contents of a report
  to the women who had the miscarriages
  All of us make moral judgements about
  the laws that govern us. We will not have
  anarchy because Greenpeace activists
  scaled a fence and exposed themselves
  to the most poisonous substances known
  (protective clothing notwithstanding). I
  support their actions in this case.
  And we will have breakins of our
  homes and offices. But they will not use
  the Greenpeace action as precedent for
  this activity. The FBI, NSA, and CIA have
  provided adequate precedent. I will
  personally not feel any contradiction
  protesting such breakins while supporting
  Greenpeace's actions...