Next step, call them terrorists and lock them all up at Guantonimo without a trial or proof or lawyers or any of that crap. Then follow with the stupid anti-war protestors, then those damn hippy grocery store strikers in California, then the traitorous journalists who disgree with the administration, and then of course the Democrats. Then we finally have that nice facist police that people have wanted for years now. Woohoo.

Looks into the_god_Niti's magic 8-ball.
Out look not so good.

For want of a nail, the war was lost.

For want of a chad, the country was lost.

I don't know, having broken that law would almost be a point of pride. It'd be interesting to see how people would react to, "guilty of sailor-mongering" when looking at an application for work.

Bush, he must be shaven.

Constitution, shmonstitution.

the_god_ninti

Next step, call them terrorists and lock them all up at Guantonimo without a trial or proof or lawyers or any of that crap. Then follow with the stupid anti-war protestors, then those damn hippy grocery store strikers in California, then the traitorous journalists who disgree with the administration, and then of course the Democrats. Then we finally have that nice facist police that people have wanted for years now. Woohoo.

You're hired.

Your tax dollars at work fighting THE WAR ON CRITICISM

Go after Paul Pierce next? Huh. I didn't even know he was doing anything suspicious.

Anyone else reminded of Good Will Hunting?

So, I guess I'm the only one who'd be happy to see Greenpeace have to atone a wee bit for some of their antics? Funny, when other governments have taken far more extreme action against them in the past I don't recall many people being too upset. I guess it's because Dubya is doing it.

As for silencing a vocal critic - Greenpeace wasn't exactly a friend to Clinton. That's sort of the whole thing about being a protest organization: you protest against anyone in power.

And yes, I'm sure this is a step on the slippery slope to locking up everyone and their dog who "disagrees with the administration", just like "they" called "everyone who disagrees" a "traitor".

Meanwhile, back in reality ...

We aren't even pretending anymore, are we?

I LOVE TEH LEADER!

I'm bored... Hey, can I join greenpeace online? I'm bored with this clean criminal record...

More broadly, say rights activists, a conviction could have a chilling effect on other organizations that practice nonviolent protest.

no, you worthless wacked up greenpeace farknuts, it's not a nonviolent protest, it's an illegal activity. these assturds think they can break the law at their liking and nothing should be done about it. guess again.

these assturds think they can break the law at their liking and nothing should be done about it.

You mean, like the invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation?

Anyone in here not a conspiracy theorist? Screw greenpeace.

fark Greenpeace. They're an extreme version of PETA, and they need to be kncoked down a few pegs.

ou mean, like the invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation?

yes, but why bring Kosovo into the discussion?

I had a misspelling with post preview? That's unpossible!

Gee, boarding a ship at sea? Then not wanting to get off? I'd go out 15 miles and shot them all as pirates if I was captian.

ARRRRRR MATIES!

So the one time they aren't being complete douchebags (only partial ones) is when they get hit with this law.

If this prosecution is an isolated incident, fine.

If the government starts severely prosecuting nonviolent protests based on obscure laws on a regular basis, not fine.

I think this is something to watch, at least.

Wow... this has got to be close to a perfect flamewar-inducing article. Nearly all the classic elements. Only thing missing is some sort of religious angle.

I must admit, I agree with the tag line...do something about The Truth commercials...damn annoying commercials.

OK, Chelsea Clinton Is Carrot Top's Lost Twin, then why not charge them with tresspassing, which they clearly were, rather than "Sailor Mongering" a law from 1872 that has been used a grand total of TWICE?

The purpose of this law was to keep bars and whores from luring sailors off of the ships, leaving them unattended and unprotected.

And why haven't charges been filed against the company that owned the ship's cargo, as well as the ship, for transporting illegal goods into the country?

Is it because of Clinton? I know that's you're standard response.

What Project-Lamer said, shoot the tree huggin hippies. You tresspass, you risk it. Someone were to board my house, they get the 357.

What would happen if people did this to Greenpeace ships? Plus how much heavy oil fuel do these ships burn an hour anyway? Plus the two stroke motors on their rubber boats?

Yeah, and Martin Luther King should have just asked nicely for equal rights. Sometimes you have to break the law to show your point and get attention. Do you honestly think that these people were doing anytning that warents this kind of punishment? What happened to the bill of rights? If this is not cruel and unusual punishment, then welcome to the National Socialist States of America.

Fark Greenpeace, they're a bunch of terrorists in disguise.

2003-11-15 01:45:49 AM TheLoneIguana


Wow... this has got to be close to a perfect flamewar-inducing article. Nearly all the classic elements. Only thing missing is some sort of religious angle.


God told me to do it. There you go!

Sounds like typical Bush environmental policy to me. Next...

Good, damn hippies.

Greenpeace is the environment's PETA, poorly planned movements and assbat insane people working for them.


Wise Use 4 Life!

They quoted the wrong statute. Here it is for those interested (From United States Code Annotated, West)

18 U.S.C. 2279 - Boarding vessels before arrival

"Whoever, not being in the United States service, and not being duly authorized by law for the purpose, goes on board any vessel about to arrive at the place of her destination, before her actual arrival, and before she has been completely moored, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than six months, or both.


The master of such vessel may take any such person into custody, and deliver him up forthwith to any law enforcement officer, to be by him taken before any committing magistrate, to be dealt with according to law."

The most recent case is U.S. v. Sullivan, 43 F. 602, 14 Sawy. 610 (C.C.D.Or. Oct 08, 1890).

One more reason for me to hate Ashcroft and the Bush Team.

-Indy

Go into port hanging them all from the highest yardarm

$5 they would NOT fark with you anymore.

Sgt Otter:

"They can piss and moan about how obscure the law is, but it basically boils down to trespassing. It ain't their boat, they weren't invited onboard, they snuck on. boo hoo."


Yeah, so charge them with TRESSPASSING

The only reason that Ashcroft is using this obscure law in this ridiculous manner is in an attempt to harm Greenpeace, which is NOT part of his job.

Get a clue

more like

when other governments have taken far more extreme action

Operative word being other, of course.

Get those rotten, hippy, nutsqueezing, turdburgling, egghuffing, furshaving, hatwearing, papershreading, boobconcealing, asswhipping, upthehersheryhighwayhaving, smelly, shlongsucking whores at peta, too!

ok, Prospero424, i'll take the easy one first...

And why haven't charges been filed against the company that owned the ship's cargo, as well as the ship, for transporting illegal goods into the country?

to quote from the article:

THE GREENPEACE demonstration off the coast of Florida on April 12, 2002,

In November 2002, the United Nations Environmental Program upgraded protection of mahogany under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES),

now, would you please explain to me where the illegal activity you asked about is (besides the one greenpeace committed)?

Sic the French on them.

*remember the Rainbow Warrior

The captain of the ship should have thrown these assholes overboard to feed the sharks. It used to be that boarding a ship that wasn't yours was called piracy. Now it's "tresspassing" or a "sit-in"? fark that, fark Greenpeace, and fark the captain who was too spineless to kick these extremist pricks off his ship.

Prospero424

Not being fulling up on Naval Law, I know that it is different then common law. Being on board a ship agaist the captain's wishes is a no-no.

Most Misleading. Headline. Ever.

Greenpeace broke the farking law.

Bush administration takes an aggressive stand against them.

Liberals get pissed.

But if YOU'RE stuff was stolen or YOU'RE family members were hurt or YOU'RE profit margins were hurt, then Bush wouldn't be doing enough to stop it.

Hypocrites.

it's rediculous....

i read earlier today about a bill being proposed that would make possession of any pirated movie a max of 3 years in jail + a fine. 3 years! i've seen news stories about drunk drivers that kill people with that much time served. it would also be 5 years for bringing recording equipment into a movie theater. Tommy Chong is in jail for selling bongs, not even for pot. Meanwhile, I keep hearing about overcrowded prisons. I don't understand any of it.

Thomas Payne is a spinnin in his grave

wil, your post made me laugh out loud about something that is in no way funny.

I cant say I 100% agree with Greenpeace, but this type of legal wrangling is scary.

Greenpeace = hippy idiots

French = Greenpeace murderers

...meh, I dislike both groups.