Some Causes Just Aren't Worth Dying For

[TheBlondOne]

I'm sorry, and I feel badly for the family. But this is just a tad bit ridiculous.

--Sarah

 

[Speedy3D!]

Really sorry to hear that she died, but she is a victim of her own stupidity.

 

[Czar]

I think this is the third thread about this subject.

 

[Red Dawn]

Yep and twenty years from now she would have looked at this time of her life as her foolish period.

 

[Red Dawn]

<< I think this is the third thread about this subject. >>

Yeah but you want to know what's more annoying Czar? When people go "This is a Repost " At least it is for me.

 

[piku]

Tch. No sympathy from me.

 

[Czar]

<<

<< I think this is the third thread about this subject. >>

Yeah but you want to know what's more annoying Czar? When people go "This is a Repost " At least it is for me. >>


I understand, expecialy on subjects posted months ago... but one of the posts about this subject is just a little down the page.. posted by nfs4

 

[Geekbabe]

<<

<<

<< I think this is the third thread about this subject. >>

Yeah but you want to know what's more annoying Czar? When people go "This is a Repost " At least it is for me. >>


I understand, expecialy on subjects posted months ago... but one of the posts about this subject is just a little down the page.. posted by nfs4 >>



oh, so what ? it's Sunday, chill dude !

 

[djheater]

Umm wait. Her intention was certainly not to martyr herself for a cause. Her death was an accident. Her alleged stupidity may or may not have had something to do with falling out of a tree (why in god's name they built the shelter 15 stories in the air is beyond me) but it is not related to her cause in any real way. What's the name of that fallacy?....

ah yes:

Converse accident / Hasty generalization
This fallacy is the reverse of the Fallacy of Accident. It occurs when one forms a general rule by examining only a few specific cases which are not representative of all possible cases.

Tree huggers are not necessarily stupid and therefore prone to falling to thier deaths as was implied.

After personally witnessing the ecological and cultural pillaging perpetrated by mining companies in the Appalachians I am more than willing to assume that the tree huggers had the right of it. I'm willing to revise my opinion, of course, if somone can present a reason to.

 

[LaBang]

I think that it is a cause worth dying for to some people. The US only has 2.5-3% of it's native old growth trees left!! That is nothing at all!! Plus the timber companies are logging their last holdings at a faster rate then normal because they realize that the game won't last much longer. Have you ever been to one of these forests? If you haven't you probably couldn't imaging the intrinsic value that they hold. These forest will never recover. Once they are gone they are gone forever (or at least forever in feasible time).

People have tried to protect the forests in ways besides tree sits. None have succeded like direct action. People can protest in the streets and write letters but the timber industry has more say than the people. GW BUSH recieved over 3 million letters from people supporting the roadless area act that clinton made after recieving 1.5 million letters. Bush reversed the act because of the power of a handfull of state officials and lots of money from special lobbies. Direct action (like treesitting) is the only way to have an effect on something that needs urgent attention.

 

[Czar]

<< oh, so what ? it's Sunday, chill dude ! >>


I'm chill.. plenty chill... it snowed last night.. everything is white:Q

 

[bulldawg]

<< Yeah but you want to know what's more annoying Czar? When people go "This is a Repost " At least it is for me. >>



Agreed.

 

[yakko]

I guess she never heard of safety equipment.

 

[Hossenfeffer]

Yeah, there were safety lines available and she wasn't taking advantage of them. As for tree-sitting, I wouldn't do it, I don't entirely agree with it, but I can't dispute that it puts a big slow down on logging plans.

 

[eakers]

i think that its noble to risk your life for something that you believe in so badly.

trees were important to her.


*kat. <-- eating summer sausage made from bear meat and its too yummy.

 

[Muadib]

Damn, that's just sad.

 

[loup garou]

From the article:


<< Tree sitters live in plywood platforms attached to the upper limbs of trees slated for logging. >>


Irony? Yes, please.

 

[rgwalt]

<< From the article:


<< Tree sitters live in plywood platforms attached to the upper limbs of trees slated for logging. >>


Irony? Yes, please. >>



Bwahahahaha!

Ryan

 

[Jzero]

I'm a level 5 vegan. I don't eat anything that casts a shadow.

 

[Emos]

<< These forest will never recover. Once they are gone they are gone forever >>


Ummm forgive my ignorance but aren't trees something that GROW and thus are a renewable resource? If a forest fire incinerates a bunch of trees is the patch of forest lost FOREVER?

 

[olouie]

400 posts.... woo hoo!

 

[StageLeft]

dumb

 

[Mookow]

<< From the article:


<< Tree sitters live in plywood platforms attached to the upper limbs of trees slated for logging. >>


Irony? Yes, please. >>



Yeah, I saw that too. I wonder what their rationalization for using wood to protest cutting trees down was, or if they are even smart enough to see the irony.

 

[Jzero]

<< Yeah, I saw that too. I wonder what their rationalization for using wood to protest cutting trees down was, or if they are even smart enough to see the irony. >>


Nope. These are the kind of people who think irony is like rain on your wedding day.

 

[Maetryx]

Most likely they drove cars (made out of metal, fueld by petroleum: both products mined). They probably wear clothes that have metal zippers, metal eyelets and rubber soles. They might have glasses made out of metal. They print their propaganda on paper, I assume. Or post it on the internet fueld by the electrons of our national energy grid.