Warriors burn bridge, demand mining company behind Mount Polley toxic spill leave territory(15. Oct)

[hue]

Published on Oct 9, 2012

Secwepemc are fighting the imperial metals ruddock creek project from operating in their Sacred Headwaters to the Adams River, World's largest sockeye salmon spawning grounds. unsurrendered Secwepemc Territory.

http://aptn.ca/news/2014/10/15/warriors-burn-bridge-demand-mining-company-behind-mount-polley-toxic-spill-leave-territory/
APTN National News
An Indigenous resistance group under the name of Secwepemc Ts’ka7 Warriors burned a bridge connected to a proposed British Columbia zinc and lead mine owned by the mining company now trying to clean up the Mount Polley environmental disaster, APTN National News has independently confirmed.

Ts’ka7 Warriors issued a statement Wednesday taking responsibility for torching a bridge at the Ruddock Creek Mine operation, of which Imperial Metals is the majority owner.

[zeemike]

1. The free market don't care about the water or the fish.

Or the people who eat and drink it...it cares about extracting profit from the land only.
It won't be long before this warrior group is listed as terrorist.

[rhett o rick]

2. I'm sure they are already listed as terrorists. The question is, is terrorism justified

if one is fighting for goodness? The American Revolution has a nice ring to it, but it wasn't really a typical revolution. It was more of an insurgency using terrorist tactics to drive out the capitalist/imperialist overlords. Similar to what's happening in the Middle East.

[salib]

3. This is not terrorism.

The fact that people can readily accept that the label might fit is already a victory for the real economic terrorists, who threaten economic destruction if anyone challenged their self proclaimed right to profit at any cost. This is not a terrorist attack on ordinary Canadians. Obviously people in Canada have little or nothing to fear from this group.

Please consider that before reinforcing or trying to make more subtle the word "terrorist".

[tecelote]

6. Imperial Metals

They are the terrorists.

[glinda]

9. Yes they are.

[DhhD]

12. Chemical Warfare of Domestic Terrorism.

[arikara]

13. Agreed

they devastated an entire region with their toxic mess and they are still trying to push through into other places that don't belong to them. They and the governments that aid and abet them are the real terrorists.

[rhett o rick]

10. The label has been misused to indicate only those people we don't like.

The definition of terrorism is: "The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons."

I sympathize with those fighting the abusive corporations, but the corporations are usually working within the law and those trying to stop them with violence are not.

My main point is that it's a matter of perspective as to who are the terrorists and who are not. I contend that the Americans in the American Revolution were terrorists, but I support their actions. When Native Americans were raiding settlements, were they terrorists? Or were the settlers that raided the Native American settlements?

[salib]

11. First, define your terms

Do not know where that particular definition is from, however it is not out of place with some others:
- FBI: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/terrorism/terrorism-definition
- the first one from Dictionary.com: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/terrorism
- again the short definition this time from Merriam-Webster: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/terrorism

However, those do not mention the word that is most important to include, i.e. "Terror". To me, and many other definitions on the web (including those longer ones above), that is a crucial feature. If you require "terrorizing the populace" in the definition, then 9-11 is a terrorist attack, but this one in the OP is not really.

That is the distinction, that if forgotten allows those in power to label others who resist their actions as "terrorists". While those same powerful corporations are practicing economic terrorism (based upon fear and threats to the general populace), as I pointed out in my earlier post.

Please do not cherry-pick a definition, one that is without the words terror and populace, just to play into the meme of the powerful and cruel.

[Helen Borg]

4. With that name, I'm sure they are listed as such.

[blackspade]

14. This would more accurately be sabotage.

Not terrorism.

[tecelote]

5. The Cree Agree...

[calimary]

7. Stealing this.

It's worth reminding people.

[heaven05]

8. glad to see this

from a purely historic point of view, of course.