Talk:Eco-terrorism: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 03:38, 24 April 2005

Revision as of 11:03, 25 April 2005

Line 13:

:Essentially "ecoterrorism" is what everyone else calls them and "terrist" is their own term for themselves. Calling it "only propaganda" is your own POV, and an attempt to discredit the term. "eco-terrorism' return [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=lang_en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_qdr=all&q=eco-terrorism&lr=lang_en] 12,400 while "terrist" return 766 [http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=lang_en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&as_qdr=all&q=terrist&lr=lang_en] (with wikipedia as the top 2). [[User:M123|M123]] 17:54, 24 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Allowing the Wiki FUCK FUCK FUCK to reflect a blatant oxymoron such as "eco-terrorism" is ridiculous. There is no violence against any person whatsoever involved in ecotage and, therefore, there cannot be any violence against a subset of persons (namely, civillians). This entry is an oxymoron, at best, and a more accurate soci-political discussion must include the fact that it is also used as a propaganda tool by the multinational resource extraction and refining corporations against which most ecotage occurs. [[User:Bangarang|Bangarang]]

Violence against a person is not necessary for it to be considered terrorism. See my comment below. --[[User:Xinoph|Xinoph]] 03:58, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)