[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