Shell to Sea campaigner jailed for 3 months. 14th Feb

Ms Ní Ghraidm plead­ed guilty to a Sec­tion 8 and 9 charge and refused to do com­mu­ni­ty ser­vice as she felt her protest was a ser­vice to a com­mu­ni­ty under siege from Shell. The Judge then sen­tenced Ms Ní Ghraidm to 3 months in jail.

Ms Ní Ghraidm plead­ed guilty to a Sec­tion 8 and 9 charge and refused to do com­mu­ni­ty ser­vice as she felt her protest was a ser­vice to a com­mu­ni­ty under siege from Shell. The Judge then sen­tenced Ms Ní Ghraidm to 3 months in jail.

Izzy has been a strong sup­port­er of Shell to Sea for years and her com­mit­ment to the cause is much appre­ci­at­ed by us here in Mayo.
She has coura­geous­ly stood up for our strug­gle to pro­tect our com­mu­ni­ty and is pas­sion­ate in her fight to reclaim Irish nat­ur­al resources.

Speak­ing from the Court, Shell to Sea spokesper­son Ter­ence Con­way stat­ed “Yes­ter­day in Bel­mul­let Dis­trict court, we saw a com­mit­ted envi­ron­men­tal cam­paign­er being jailed for a minor pub­lic order inci­dent. On the oth­er hand a Shell secu­ri­ty guard who was caught deal­ing drugs is allowed to walk free. Ms Ní Ghraidm has tak­en a brave stand to sup­port this com­mu­ni­ty’s strug­gle against a greedy multi­na­tion­al that will do what­ev­er it is allowed to by the sub­servient State insti­tu­tions”.

Mr Con­way con­tin­ued “What we’re expe­ri­enc­ing is the selec­tive appli­ca­tion of the law. Yes­ter­day Prov­i­dence Resources dropped their Dublin Bay oil drilling licence because the State has not got it’s required EU envi­ron­men­tal laws in place. The same EU envi­ron­men­tal laws apply to Cor­rib but are being ignored.”

Fracking Saboteur Sentenced to 6 Months. 13 Feb

As far as we can tell, there’s been no clear rea­son expressed about why he did it.

As far as we can tell, there’s been no clear rea­son expressed about why he did it. But does there real­ly need to be? Any­one who risks their free­dom to attack a frack­ing site in the Mar­cel­lus Shale, and in one evening suc­ceeds at delay­ing oper­a­tions for three months, is a hero to all who drink water and hate ener­gy cor­po­ra­tions.

Tan­ner Long, 21, from the Trout Run area of Lycoming Coun­ty, PA, alleged­ly admit­ted to an ambi­tious act of van­dal­ism on August 30, 2012, and was sen­tenced in late-Jan­u­ary to six months of prison (in a “coun­ty pre-release cen­ter”) and five years pro­ba­tion.

The sto­ry was not heav­i­ly report­ed out­side the local area, but you can check out a short news clip here, which includes heart warm­ing images of over­turned bull­doz­ers at a trashed frack­ing site on pub­lic land. You can also send him a let­ter here for the time being:

Tan­ner J. Long #3625
Lycoming Coun­ty Prison
277 West Third Street
Williamsport, PA 17701

What we know of the sto­ry: In Sep­tem­ber 2012, a $10,000 reward was offered by Brubach­er Ener­gy Ser­vices for any infor­ma­tion lead­ing to the arrest and con­vic­tion of who­ev­er van­dal­ized con­struc­tion equip­ment in Loy­al­sock State For­est. 

Accord­ing to Myron Brubach­er, an own­er of the Lan­cast­er Coun­ty company.”They basi­cal­ly cut the trees to block access to the road where our equip­ment was locat­ed.”

The van­dals, who had some­how acquired keys, used pieces of equip­ment to dam­age oth­er pieces of equip­ment. In total, the com­pa­ny report­ed $120,000 in dam­ages.

“They rolled sev­er­al pieces, one of our machines was rolled over on its side. They did a lot of dam­age,” Brubach­er said. “It took three months to repair the dam­age.”

He added that the com­pa­ny has increased secu­ri­ty since the van­dal­ism.

Lycoming Coun­ty Judge Nan­cy L. Butts  told Long to “grow up.” While we at the EF! Newswire could see  the poten­tial for fla­grant Bart Simp­son-inspired imma­tu­ri­ty when fac­ing off with some­one named Judge Butts, her hon­or was appar­ent­ly refer­ring to Long’s hero­ic van­dal­ism being imma­ture (as opposed any per­son­al insult  to Butts that one may have eas­i­ly been tempt­ed to utter, as we were.)

While three oth­ers report­ed­ly watched on the night of Aug. 30, Long start­ed heavy equip­ment belong­ing to Brubach­er Ener­gy, of Bow­mans­ville, at a well site off Route 14 north of Trout Run.

Whaling fleet in chaos as scattered Japanese poachers abandon harpoon ship dangerously low on fuel.

MELBOURNE, Aus­tralia  — An anony­mous source with­in Korea has report­ed that the Japan­ese whal­ing fleet is in total dis­ar­ray, with Sea Shep­herd Australia’s ship the SSS Sam Simo

MELBOURNE, Aus­tralia  — An anony­mous source with­in Korea has report­ed that the Japan­ese whal­ing fleet is in total dis­ar­ray, with Sea Shep­herd Australia’s ship the SSS Sam Simon tail­ing the refu­elling tanker for the Japan­ese whal­ing fleet, the Pana­man­ian-reg­is­tered and South Kore­an-owned ves­sel Sun Lau­rel.  The Sam Simon plans to fol­low the Sun Lau­rel in hopes to track them straight to the Nis­shin Maru.

The source detailed that the Sun Lau­rel was only con­tract­ed to refu­el the Japan­ese whal­ing fleet until mid-Feb­ru­ary, but because Japan’s Whal­ing Pro­gram is so close­ly con­nect­ed to their com­mer­cial fish­ing inter­ests, they are using their clout with­in the fish­ing indus­try, attempt­ing to pres­sure the Sun Lau­rel to refu­el the whalers below 60° in Aus­trali­a’s Antarc­tic Ter­ri­to­ry, with the threat of black­list­ing the Sun Lau­rel from future con­tracts if they don’t abide.

Sea Shep­herd Aus­tralia Direc­tor, Jeff Hansen states, “The Yushin Maru is in a des­per­ate sit­u­a­tion, quite pos­si­bly unable to get to safe­ty in the event of an emer­gency. The Japan­ese whal­ing fleet would­n’t be in this predica­ment if they weren’t pari­ahs for their ille­gal whal­ing; unwel­come to refu­el in any land-based port with­out scruti­ny and banned from Aus­tralian ports, they must hire a refu­elling ves­sel sim­ply to be fuelled for their ille­gal poach­ing.  These poach­ers are in con­tempt of an Aus­tralian Fed­er­al Court rul­ing and should not be in the South­ern Ocean Whale Sanc­tu­ary in the first place. The South Kore­an ves­sel, the Sun Lau­rel is sup­ply­ing fuel to the ille­gal oper­a­tions of the Japan­ese whal­ing fleet, which is akin to sup­ply­ing equip­ment to ele­phant poach­ers in Africa.”

Oper­a­tion Zero Tol­er­ance Co-Cam­paign Leader, Bob Brown stat­ed, “Once again, Japan’s whal­ing fleet is flout­ing inter­na­tion­al law. Now it is draw­ing in the Gov­ern­ment of South Korea, which so wise­ly decid­ed against whal­ing last year. South Korea should order this tanker to turn around and go home. Oth­er­wise it invites world con­dem­na­tion instead of the praise it so recent­ly enjoyed.”

The source report­ed that the Yushin Maru is sep­a­rat­ed from the fleet by hun­dreds of miles, very low on fuel and unable to pro­ceed unless refu­elled.  This indi­cates that the Yushin Maru has been total­ly aban­doned by the Nis­shin Maru and the rest of the Japan­ese whal­ing fleet in their hour of need.

Cap­tain of the SSS Steve Irwin, Sid­dharth Charkravar­ty recounts: “While in pur­suit of the Nis­shin Maru, the Steve Irwin picked up the Yushin Maru as a tail­ing ves­sel, rid­ing extreme­ly high out of the water, indi­cat­ing that they were very low on fuel.  A few days lat­er when the whalers tried to swap the Yushin Maru with a ful­ly fuelled Yushin Maru No. 3, the Steve Irwin instead chased the Yushin Maru in the oppo­site direc­tion of the whaler’s fac­to­ry ship for 150 miles.  Dur­ing this chase, the Yushin Maru was unable to reach their full speed of 20+ knots, but was bare­ly able to eke out 16–17 knots, con­firm­ing that they were low on fuel and hence run­ning at a more fuel-sav­ing speed.”  Since then, this Kore­an source reports, the Yushin Maru is con­serv­ing their mea­gre fuel stores and is unable to cov­er the ground between them and the Nis­shin Maru.

Rather than remain with their sis­ter ship, or even trans­fer fuel to them, the Yushin Maru No. 3 instead chose to aban­don the Yushin Maru in the treach­er­ous waters of the South­ern Ocean in order to chase the Sea Shep­herd ship Steve Irwin.

Sea Shep­herd Founder, Paul Wat­son says, “This action shows the neg­li­gence of the whal­ing com­man­der, not only for the sanc­ti­ty of the whales of the South­ern Ocean Whale Sanc­tu­ary, but an utter and total dis­re­gard for the life and safe­ty of the crews who work on these death ships.  Last year, on Oper­a­tion Divine Wind, when one of Sea Shep­herd’s ships, the Brigitte Bar­dot, was com­pro­mised, we stopped our entire cam­paign to escort them to port and ensure their safe­ty.  It’s not sur­pris­ing that the whalers share no such cama­raderie for one anoth­er, since their entire motive for being in these waters is ruth­less greed.”

Cap­tain Peter Ham­marst­edt, aboard the SSS Bob Bark­er said, “Oper­a­tion Zero Tol­er­ance has had vic­to­ries in so many forms, from inter­cept­ing the whalers’ fuelling ves­sel, and thus cut­ting their sea­son, to pulling two-thirds of the fleets’ har­poon ships entire­ly out of oper­a­tion, and keep­ing the sole remain­ing har­poon­er with the fac­to­ry ship run­ning, stunt­ing their progress, and severe­ly lim­it­ing their abil­i­ty to poach Antarc­ti­ca’s pris­tine waters.  We also inter­cept­ed the whal­ing fleet before they had a chance to fire a sin­gle har­poon.”

The Bob Bark­er con­tin­ues to chase and hunt the whalers’ butcher­ing ship, the Nis­shin Maru, unen­cum­bered by a tail, and aid­ed by a fleet of aer­i­al scout­ing drones.

http://www.seashepherd.org.au/news-and-media/2013/02/10/japanese-whaling-fleet-abandons-harpoon-vessel-nearly-empty-on-fuel-1491

Lifelong Oklahoman Youth Pastor Locked to Machinery in Protest of Keystone XL 11 Feb

Ear­li­er this morn­ing, Ste­fan Warn­er, a youth pas­tor who was born and raised in Har­rah, OK, locked him­self to machin­ery being used to build the tox­ic Key­stone XL tar sands pipeline through Creek land near Schoolton, OK.

Warn­er is tak­ing action to pro­tect the health of the North Cana­di­an Riv­er, com­mu­ni­ties and land that this pipeline would run through from being irre­versibly dam­aged by dilut­ed bitu­men (tar sands) leaks and spills. He is send­ing a clear mes­sage that the cur­rent day colo­nial­ism and dis­re­gard for the health and sov­er­eign­ty of indige­nous peo­ples in Alber­ta, Cana­da, and along the pipeline is unacceptable—from a Chris­t­ian per­spec­tive, as well as a human per­spec­tive.

Tar sands pipelines have a hor­ren­dous track record: the exist­ing Key­stone 1 pipeline leaked 12 times in its first year, and at least thir­ty times to date. In 2010, the added dan­gers of tar sands pipelines were demon­strat­ed by Enbridge’s Line 6B pipeline spill of more than a mil­lion gal­lons of dilut­ed bitu­men into the Kala­ma­zoo Riv­er in Michi­gan. The Kala­ma­zoo tar sands spill is the costli­est inland spill in U.S. his­to­ry, drain­ing the oil spill cof­fers and plac­ing the $800 mil­lion and ris­ing price tag onto the backs of local and fed­er­al tax­pay­ers. But it is not the mon­e­tary bur­den that weighs heav­i­est. It is the toll on human life and the health of local ecosys­tems that is immea­sur­able, espe­cial­ly the tox­i­c­i­ty of the dilut­ed bitu­men and undis­closed pro­pri­etary chem­i­cals has proven dev­as­tat­ing.

In addi­tion to the immense dan­gers posed by the Key­stone XL, Tran­sCana­da has been mis­rep­re­sent­ing the eco­nom­ic effects of the pipeline. The major­i­ty of con­struc­tion jobs are tem­po­rary and have been filled by Wis­con­sin-based con­trac­tor Michel’s, not Okla­homans and Tex­ans. Despite Tran­sCana­da and the State Department’s rhetoric of ener­gy inde­pen­dence, the dilut­ed bitu­men trans­port­ed by the Key­stone XL is des­tined for export to for­eign mar­kets after being refined in Gulf Coast refiner­ies, and the Nation­al Resources Defense Coun­cil asserts that the KXL will increase domes­tic gas prices.

“I grew up in a town where the North Cana­di­an Riv­er runs right through, and we can’t let the North Cana­di­an become anoth­er Kala­ma­zoo,” said Okla­homan youth pas­tor Ste­fan Warn­er. “I fig­ure folks have to take action to stop our beau­ti­ful Okla­homa from being marred by a for­eign cor­po­ra­tion, and stand up to fight big cor­po­ra­tions who think that poi­son­ing peo­ple and steal­ing land is accept­able so long as they make a prof­it.”

Warn­er is act­ing with Great Plains Tar Sands Resis­tance, a coali­tion of Okla­homans and allies fight­ing to pre­vent con­struc­tion of the Key­stone XL which will bring dan­ger­ous and tox­ic dilut­ed bitu­men from the bio­me-con­sum­ing tar sands gigapro­ject to refin­ery com­mu­ni­ties in the Gulf. This action comes in the wake of dozens of sim­i­lar actions which have active­ly fought con­struc­tion of the Key­stone XL in Okla­homa and Texas. In light of reports of shod­dy weld­ing by Tran­sCana­da whistle­blow­er Evan Vokes and the recent release of pho­tographs depict­ing holes in the weld of a pipe buried in Texas, the strug­gle to keep the Key­stone XL from being com­plet­ed is even more urgent.

Updates

At 8 a.m., direct sup­port for Ste­fan was arrest­ed with­out warn­ing and placed in police car. Six oth­er peo­ple on site are being detained.

At 9 a.m., six peo­ple detained now arrest­ed. Sev­en police vehi­cles are on scene. Work­ers have low­ered side-boom in dis­re­gard of Stefan’s safe­ty and OSHA reg­u­la­tions. Ste­fan is still locked to machin­ery but lying painful­ly face-down on the low­ered arm. Police are obscur­ing Ste­fan from view and not allow­ing any­one with­in pho­tograph­ing dis­tance.

At 9:15 a.m., anoth­er indi­vid­ual arrest­ed. This per­son was not ini­tial­ly detained but was pre­vent­ed from access­ing her vehi­cle since 8 a.m. Ste­fan
is still hold­ing strong. It also appears that this action is also blockad­ing an active frack site.

Indigenous resistance forces Malaysia to scale back twelve dam megaproject

A Malaysian state min­is­ter Fri­day said the gov­ern­ment would not push ahead with build­ing a dozen new dams on Bor­neo island, acknowl­edg­ing they have caused out­rage from local tribes and envi­ron­men­tal­ists.

A Malaysian state min­is­ter Fri­day said the gov­ern­ment would not push ahead with build­ing a dozen new dams on Bor­neo island, acknowl­edg­ing they have caused out­rage from local tribes and envi­ron­men­tal­ists.

The pro­pos­als sparked fears that the dams would destroy pris­tine rain­forests, endan­ger wildlife, and dis­place natives in Sarawak, a Malaysian state crossed by pow­er­ful rivers with rich jun­gle habi­tats.

“It is not a firm plan to build 12 dams. I don’t think we will need that. We will only need four,” James Mas­ing, Sarawak’s state min­is­ter of land devel­op­ment, told AFP in an inter­view.

Mas­ing said the gov­ern­ment was back­ing off in response to wide­spread crit­i­cism. Protests over the years have seen activists and locals stag­ing block­ades of roads into dam areas.

“I’m pleased that this type of thing (protests) takes place. Not all that we do is cor­rect, and this shows we need to refine our plans and think again,” he said.

The now-com­plete Bakun mega-dam, which is not part of the new dam pro­pos­al, has already been dogged for years by claims of cor­rup­tion in con­struc­tion con­tracts, the flood­ing of a huge swathe of rain­for­est and the dis­place­ment of thou­sands of tribes­peo­ple.

Despite that, the gov­ern­ment moot­ed con­struct­ing more dams as part of an indus­tri­al devel­op­ment dri­ve to boost the resource-rich state’s back­ward econ­o­my.

Anoth­er dam at Murum, also deep in the inte­ri­or, is near­ing com­ple­tion and two oth­ers are in the plan­ning stages as part of the new pro­pos­al.

Togeth­er the four dams — at Bakun, Murum, Baleh and Baram — are already expect­ed to put out near­ly 6,000 megawatts of pow­er, six times what Sarawak cur­rent­ly uses, Mas­ing said.

“The protests are becom­ing more vocal on the ground so (the dam rethink) is a very good devel­op­ment for me,” said Peter Kallang, mem­ber of a Sarawak tribe and chair­man of SAVE Rivers, an NGO that has cam­paigned against the dams.

How­ev­er, he said plans for the Baram and Baleh dams should be scrapped as well, not­ing that the Baram dam would dis­place about 20,000 peo­ple, com­pared to about 10,000 at Bakun, and destroy irre­place­able for­est.

He said SAVE Rivers last month organ­ised a float­ing protest along the Baram riv­er that cruised down riv­er for three days and was met with sup­port along the way by local tribes­peo­ple.

Kallang and oth­er activists have also trav­elled abroad to lob­by against the dams, includ­ing meet­ing offi­cials of Hydro Tas­ma­nia, an Aus­tralian cor­po­ra­tion that advis­es the Sarawak gov­ern­ment on the dams.

The Tas­ma­nia gov­ern­ment cor­po­ra­tion pledged in Decem­ber after meet­ing the activists that it would pull its per­son­nel out of Sarawak by the end of 2013, Kallang said.

Sarawak’s tribes — eth­ni­cal­ly dis­tinct from Malaysia’s major­i­ty Malays — fear that they will lose their ances­tral lands and hunt­ing and bur­ial grounds, as the gov­ern­ment encour­ages them to make way for projects and move into new set­tle­ments.

Those are equipped with med­ical clin­ics, elec­tric­i­ty, and Inter­net access. But vil­lage elders and activists say alco­holism, drug use, and crime are on the increase and anger is ris­ing over con­tin­u­ing encroach­ment on native lands.

In one of the block­ades in 2011, Penan tribes­peo­ple blocked roads into their lands for a week to protest log­ging and alleged riv­er pol­lu­tion by Malaysian firm Inter­hill until the block­ade was dis­man­tled by author­i­ties.

Misdirection & Target Selection, Part 1

We’re up against a lot. With hun­dreds of species going extinct every day, with the oceans being vac­u­umed of life, with the last ves­tiges of wild forests being felled or burned and the heart of the plan­et being torn up to poi­son the air, civ­i­liza­tion is dri­ving Earth towards biot­ic col­lapse.

We’re up against a lot. With hun­dreds of species going extinct every day, with the oceans being vac­u­umed of life, with the last ves­tiges of wild forests being felled or burned and the heart of the plan­et being torn up to poi­son the air, civ­i­liza­tion is dri­ving Earth towards biot­ic col­lapse. We can’t afford to waste time or ener­gy with so much at stake; dis­man­tling the soci­ety that is dis­man­tling the plan­et is no easy task.

For more than 30 years now, the envi­ron­men­tal move­ment has been work­ing toward that end, yet in few (if any) cir­cum­stances have we been able to seri­ous­ly dis­lodge the foun­da­tions of indus­tri­al­ism. Despite our best efforts, the species count con­tin­ues to decline as the car­bon con­tin­ues to rise. Those we’re up against are well pro­tect­ed and have immense resources at hand to pro­tect them­selves from dis­rup­tion.

Sys­tems of power—such as patri­archy, white suprema­cy, cap­i­tal­ism, civilization—safeguard them­selves through brute force. They react with over­whelm­ing vio­lence against those who oppose them. How­ev­er, this isn’t the only tool avail­able to those in pow­er, and rarely is it the first to which they reach when they feel threat­ened. One of the more sin­is­ter and effec­tive tech­niques is sys­temic mis­di­rec­tion.

Oppres­sive and destruc­tive sys­tems pro­tect them­selves first and fore­most through dis­guise and decep­tion. They hide their weak­ness­es and vul­ner­a­bil­i­ties, coax­ing us into attack­ing dum­my tar­gets or sym­bols of their pow­er, rather than the mate­r­i­al struc­tures that sup­port their pow­er. The results are ones we’re all famil­iar with (or should be): we focus our atten­tion on spe­cif­ic symp­toms of the prob­lem rather than the under­ly­ing caus­es, and our efforts for polit­i­cal change are dif­fuse and unco­or­di­nat­ed, chal­leng­ing only par­tic­u­lar man­i­fes­ta­tions of larg­er oppres­sive pow­er sys­tems, rather than the sys­tems them­selves. We wan­der into a strate­gic dead-end, and ener­gy is redi­rect­ed into the sys­tem itself.

We are guid­ed into a strate­gic dead-end, and our ener­gy is redi­rect­ed to bol­ster the sys­tem itself.

Break­ing free of this mis­di­rec­tion-dynam­ic requires a thor­ough lift­ing-back of the veil that’s been draped over our eyes. It means focus­ing our efforts where they will be most effec­tive, tar­get­ing crit­i­cal nodes and bot­tle­necks with­in indus­tri­al sys­tems to bring civ­i­liza­tion down upon itself.

We need crit­i­cal and strate­gic process­es of tar­get selec­tion. One pow­er­ful tool towards this end is the CARVER Matrix. CARVER is an ana­lyt­ic for­mu­la used by mil­i­taries and secu­ri­ty cor­po­ra­tions for the selec­tion of tar­gets (and the iden­ti­fi­ca­tion of weak points). “CARVER” is an acronym for six dif­fer­ent cri­te­ria: crit­i­cal­i­ty, acces­si­bil­i­ty, recu­per­abil­i­ty, vul­ner­a­bil­i­ty, effect, and rec­og­niz­abil­i­ty.

Crit­i­cal­i­ty is an assess­ment of tar­get val­ue and is the pri­ma­ry con­sid­er­a­tion in CARVER and tar­get selec­tion. A tar­get is crit­i­cal if destruc­tion, dam­age or dis­rup­tion has sig­nif­i­cant impact on the oper­a­tion of an enti­ty; or more blunt­ly, ‘how impor­tant is this tar­get to ene­my oper­a­tions?”  Dif­fer­ent tar­gets can be crit­i­cal to dif­fer­ent sys­tems in dif­fer­ent ways: phys­i­cal­ly (as in inter­state trans­mis­sion lines), eco­nom­i­cal­ly (such as a stock exchange), polit­i­cal­ly, social­ly, etc.

It’s impor­tant to remem­ber that noth­ing exists in a vac­u­um; soci­ety is made up of inter-relat­ed enti­ties and insti­tu­tions, and our tar­gets will be as well. Thus the crit­i­cal­i­ty of a poten­tial tar­get should be con­sid­ered in the con­text of the way that tar­get relates to larg­er sys­tems. For exam­ple, there are thou­sands of elec­tri­cal trans­mis­sion sub­sta­tions all over the world, and hence they may ini­tial­ly seem non-crit­i­cal. How­ev­er, some sub­sta­tions car­ry a much greater load than oth­ers and are sys­temic bot­tle­necks, whose dis­abling would have rip­ple effects across entire regions. Crit­i­cal­i­ty depends on sev­er­al fac­tors, includ­ing:

  • Time: How rapid­ly will the impact of the attack affect oper­a­tions?
  • Qual­i­ty: What per­cent­age of out­put, pro­duc­tion, or ser­vice will be cur­tailed by the attack?
  • Rel­a­tiv­i­ty: What will be affect­ed in the sys­tems of which the tar­get is a com­po­nent?

Acces­si­bil­i­ty refers to how fea­si­ble it is to reach the tar­get with suf­fi­cient peo­ple and resources to accom­plish the goal. What sorts of bar­ri­ers or deter­rents are in place, and how eas­i­ly they can be over­come? Acces­si­bil­i­ty includes not only reach­ing a tar­get, but the abil­i­ty to get away as well.

Recu­per­abil­i­ty is a mea­sure of how quick­ly the dam­age done to a tar­get will be repaired, replaced or bypassed. Just about any­thing can be replaced or rebuilt, but some par­tic­u­lar things are much more dif­fi­cult, such as elec­tri­cal trans­form­ers, few of which are man­u­fac­tured in the U.S. and which take months to pro­duce.

The fourth selec­tion fac­tor is vul­ner­a­bil­i­ty. Tar­gets are vul­ner­a­ble if one has the means to suc­cess­ful­ly dam­age, dis­able, or destroy them. In deter­min­ing vul­ner­a­bil­i­ty, it’s impor­tant to com­pare the scale of what is nec­es­sary to dis­able the tar­get to the capa­bil­i­ty of the “attack­ing ele­ment” to do so. For exam­ple, while an unguard­ed dam might seem a vul­ner­a­ble tar­get, if resisters had no means of brin­ing it down, it wouldn’t be con­sid­ered vul­ner­a­ble. Specif­i­cal­ly, vul­ner­a­bil­i­ty depends on the nature & con­struc­tion of the tar­get, the amount & qual­i­ty of dam­age required to dis­able it, and the avail­able assets (per­son­nel, funds, equip­ment, weapons, moti­va­tion, exper­tise, etc.).

Next is effect.  Effect con­sid­ers the sec­ondary and ter­tiary impli­ca­tions of attack­ing a tar­get, includ­ing polit­i­cal, eco­nom­ic, social, and psy­cho­log­i­cal effects. Put anoth­er way, this could be rephrased as “con­sid­er all the con­se­quences of your actions.” How will those in pow­er respond? How will the gen­er­al pop­u­lace respond? How will this affect future efforts?

Last is rec­og­niz­abil­i­ty; will the attack be rec­og­nized as such, or might it be attrib­uted to oth­er fac­tors (e.g. “It wasn’t arson­ists that burned down the facil­i­ty, it was an elec­tri­cal fire”). Depend­ing on the par­tic­u­lar cir­cum­stances, this can cut either way; tak­ing cred­it for an attack can bol­ster sup­port and bring more atten­tion to an issue, but it may also make action­ists more vul­ner­a­ble to repres­sion. Rec­og­niz­abil­i­ty also applies at a more indi­vid­ual lev­el: were fin­ger­prints or oth­er evi­dence left at the site of the tar­get through which the iden­ti­ty of the attack­ers can be deter­mined?

Often, numer­i­cal val­ues between 1 and 10 are giv­en to each of the tar­get selec­tion cri­te­ria in the CARVER Matrix, and then totaled for each poten­tial tar­get. More gen­er­al­ly, CARVER presents a crit­i­cal frame­work for strate­gic plan­ning and deci­sion-mak­ing, help­ing us to avoid mis­di­rect­ed action.

It needs to be said that this sort of crit­i­cal and cal­cu­lat­ed approach to resis­tance efforts applies to non­vi­o­lent & above­ground groups and oper­a­tions as well as those that are mil­i­tant or under­ground. Non­vi­o­lent resis­tance is too often dis­tort­ed to fit roman­ti­cized ideas of a moral high ground, and is rel­e­gat­ed to pure sym­bol­ism. But strug­gle (whether vio­lent or non­vi­o­lent) isn’t about sym­bol­ic resis­tance; it’s about fac­ing down the real­i­ty of pow­er, iden­ti­fy­ing its lynch­pins, and using force to dis­able or break them. The par­tic­u­lar tac­tics we use deter­mine the form the force will be applied in, but unless we iden­ti­fy and tar­get the crit­i­cal lynch­pins, the dai­ly destruc­tion wrought upon the earth will con­tin­ue unabat­ed as we strike at the dis­trac­tions dan­gled before us.

For too long our move­ments have fall­en prey to poor tar­get selec­tion or mis­di­rec­tion. When we’re not too busy fight­ing defen­sive bat­tles, we focus our ener­gies on those enti­ties which are either entire­ly non-crit­i­cal to the func­tion of indus­tri­al­ism or are invul­ner­a­ble giv­en our capac­i­ty for action. And the world burns while we spin our wheels.

In part 2, we will take a clos­er look at sev­er­al exam­ples of dif­fer­ent actions, apply­ing this ana­lyt­i­cal exam­i­na­tion to bet­ter under­stand the impor­tance and rel­e­vance of tar­get selec­tion in rad­i­cal move­ments.

The forces we’re up against are ruth­less and cal­cu­lat­ed; they’ll do what­ev­er they can to keep us inef­fec­tive, and when that fails, they bring down all the repres­sive force of which they’re capa­ble. If we’re to be suc­cess­ful in stop­ping indus­tri­al civ­i­liza­tion, we’ll have to iden­ti­fy and under­mine its crit­i­cal sup­port sys­tems. We don’t have much time, which is why we can’t afford to waste it on actions, tar­gets or strate­gies that don’t move us tan­gi­bly clos­er to our goals.

Sea Shepherd Activists Make January a “No Kill” Month

The month of Jan­u­ary, usu­al­ly the prime whale catch­ing month for the Japan­ese whal­ing fleet in the South­ern Ocean, has come and gone with­out the death of a sin­gle whale, says Sea Shep­herd Con­ser­va­tion Soci­ety Aus­tralia Direc­tor Jeff Hansen.

The month of Jan­u­ary, usu­al­ly the prime whale catch­ing month for the Japan­ese whal­ing fleet in the South­ern Ocean, has come and gone with­out the death of a sin­gle whale, says Sea Shep­herd Con­ser­va­tion Soci­ety Aus­tralia Direc­tor Jeff Hansen.

It is the inter­na­tion­al organization’s ninth Antarc­tic Whale Defense Cam­paign, Oper­a­tion Zero Tol­er­ance. This season’s cam­paign is under the direc­tion of Sea Shep­herd Aus­tralia, now that found­ing pres­i­dent Paul Wat­son has hand­ed author­i­ty to Hansen and for­mer Aus­tralian Greens leader and sen­a­tor Bob Brown.

Author­i­ty was trans­ferred in Decem­ber in com­pli­ance with a U.S. court restrain­ing order and after Watson’s escape last sum­mer from Ger­many, where he was detained on bail for pos­si­ble extra­di­tion to Cos­ta Rica.

The Sea Shep­herd fleet of four ships, one heli­copter, drones, and more than 120 vol­un­teer crew from around the world has to date suc­ceed­ed in keep­ing the four-ves­sel Japan­ese fleet of “research” whalers sep­a­rat­ed on the run, mak­ing it impos­si­ble for them to catch whales, Hansen says.

As an observ­er, Wat­son remains aboard the Sea Shep­herd ves­sel SSS Steve Irwin, named in hon­or of the late Aus­tralian nat­u­ral­ist and broad­cast­er.

Wat­son says he will “doc­u­ment the cam­paign” against Japan­ese whal­ing in Antarc­tic waters. The Steve Irwin is cap­tained this sea­son by for­mer first offi­cer Sid­dharth Chakravar­ty of India.

Now two inter­linked bat­tles are under­way – in the courts and at sea, where ships from both sides are maneu­ver­ing to block each oth­er.

On Jan­u­ary 31, the Japan­ese whal­ing secu­ri­ty ship Shonan Maru No. 2 entered the Aus­tralian Eco­nom­ic Exclu­sion Zone around Mac­quar­ie Island, chas­ing the Sea Shep­herd ship, the SSS Bob Bark­er.

The Bob Bark­er head­ed for World Her­itage list­ed Mac­quar­ie Island to lose the Shonan Maru No. 2 and escaped the Japan­ese ves­sel on Fri­day.

Cap­tain of the Bob Bark­er Peter Ham­marst­edt said, “The Shonan Maru No. 2 is an inte­gral part of the Japan­ese whal­ing pro­gram. On board are armed storm troop­ers from the Japan Coast Guard whose sole mis­sion is to vio­lent­ly pre­vent my crew of whale defend­ers, many of whom are Aus­tralian cit­i­zens, from uphold­ing Aus­tralian domes­tic law and inter­na­tion­al law pro­tect­ing whales.”

The Aus­tralian gov­ern­ment offi­cial­ly noti­fied the Japan­ese gov­ern­ment to order the Shonan Maru No. 2 to remain out­side of Aus­tralian ter­ri­to­r­i­al waters, includ­ing the waters around Mac­quar­ie Island.

Since 2008, the Japan­ese whal­ing fleet has been in con­tempt of an Aus­tralian Fed­er­al Court order that pro­hibits them from killing whales in Aus­tralian ter­ri­to­r­i­al waters. Despite the rul­ing, Japan’s Insti­tute for Cetacean Research announced that it intends to kill near­ly 1,000 minke and 50 endan­gered fin whales dur­ing its 2012/2013 whale-hunt­ing sea­son in the South­ern Ocean.

Only the Yushin Maru No. 2 remains with the fac­to­ry ship Nis­shin Maru and both ves­sels are far north of the whal­ing area and run­ning from con­ser­va­tion­ist ves­sels.

Co-Cam­paign Leader Bob Brown said, “The first 24 hours of con­tact with the whale poach­ers have been a vic­to­ry for Sea Shep­herd and a com­plete loss for the Japan­ese whal­ing fleet. I am delight­ed to report that not a sin­gle whale has been harmed so far.”

The speedy Sea Shep­herd ship Brigitte Bar­dot has chased the Japan­ese whaler Yushin Maru No. 3 some 300 miles to the south.

Today, a lawyer for the whalers is threat­en­ing the Sea Shep­herd with con­tempt of court action, claim­ing the Brigitte Bar­dot breached the order grant­ed by a U.S. appeals court that restrains Sea Shep­herd ves­sels from approach­ing with­in 500 yards of Japan­ese whalers.

The Decem­ber 17, 2012 injunc­tion issued in Seat­tle, Wash­ing­ton by U.S. Ninth Cir­cuit Court of Appeals states, “Defen­dants Sea Shep­herd Con­ser­va­tion Soci­ety and Paul Wat­son, and any par­ty act­ing in con­cert with them, are enjoined from phys­i­cal­ly attack­ing any ves­sel engaged by Plain­tiffs the Insti­tute of Cetacean Research, Kyo­do Sen­paku Kaisha, Ltd., Tomoyu­ki Ogawa or Toshiyu­ki Miu­ra in the South­ern Ocean or any per­son on any such ves­sel, or from nav­i­gat­ing in a man­ner that is like­ly to endan­ger the safe nav­i­ga­tion of any such ves­sel.”

Kyo­do Sen­paku Kaisha oper­ates the whal­ing fleet for the Insti­tute of Cetacean Research, a gov­ern­ment agency, while Ogawa and Miu­ra are believed to be senior offi­cers.

The injunc­tion responds to an appeal by the Insti­tute for Cetacean Research against the deci­sion of a U.S. Dis­trict Court judge, who refused to grant an injunc­tion.

The injunc­tion will remain in place until the court decides on the mer­its of the Japan­ese case oppos­ing Sea Shep­herd in Wash­ing­ton State, where the U.S. chap­ter of the group is based.

The whalers’ lawyer claims that, in vio­la­tion of the injunc­tion, the SSS Brigitte Bar­dot came with­in 20.25 yards of the Yushin Maru No. 3 on Jan­u­ary 29.

Today “The Age” reports that the group’s Mel­bourne lawyer takes the posi­tion that Sea Shep­herd Aus­tralia is respon­si­ble for the group’s Antarc­tic cam­paign and the Aus­tralian chap­ter is not sub­ject to the restrain­ing order of the U.S. court.

The U.S. Sea Shep­herd Con­ser­va­tion Soci­ety has no shares in, nor con­trol over, the Aus­tralian chap­ter, which is now run by Aus­tralians – Hansen and Bob Brown, the for­mer sen­a­tor and leader of the Aus­tralian Greens.

Wat­son was arrest­ed in Ger­many last May on a 10-year-old Cos­ta Rican war­rant, issued after a Sea Shep­herd ves­sel he com­mand­ed inter­cept­ed a Cos­ta Rican shark-finning ves­sel and was escort­ing it to a Cos­ta Rican port. The Guatemalan gov­ern­ment sent a gun­boat to force release of the shark fish­ing ves­sel, while Cos­ta Rica charged Wat­son with attempt­ed mur­der. Cos­ta Rica has since banned shark finning.

Wat­son jumped bail and left Ger­many on July 22, 2012, say­ing that the Cos­ta Rican war­rant was a maneu­ver intend­ed to deliv­er him to Japan.

At the request of Cos­ta Rica, Inter­pol has issued a Red Notice ask­ing for infor­ma­tion about the where­abouts of the 62-year-old who holds dual cit­i­zen­ship in the Unit­ed States and Cana­da.

Brown has been a con­ser­va­tion­ist for decades, both before and dur­ing the time he rep­re­sent­ed the state of Tas­ma­nia in Par­lia­ment.

“I am hon­ored to serve the great whales of the South­ern Ocean and Sea Shep­herd in this way,” Brown said. “My admi­ra­tion for Paul Wat­son is inverse­ly pro­por­tion­al to the Japan­ese government’s anger at Sea Shepherd’s suc­cess at pre­vent­ing the slaugh­ter of almost 4,000 whales in recent years.”

The Dis­cov­ery Channel’s Ani­mal Planet’s Emmy-nom­i­nat­ed show “Whale Wars” has doc­u­ment­ed the Sea Shepherd’s whale defense cam­paigns for the past five years and is also onboard this sea­son.

construction vehicles torched at deforestation site

anony­mous report, from From Rus­sia With Love:

“10/02/2013 mem­bers of ALF-Kuban torched con­struc­tion vehi­cles used for destroy­ing a grove – one of the few left – in Krasnodar.

anony­mous report, from From Rus­sia With Love:

“10/02/2013 mem­bers of ALF-Kuban torched con­struc­tion vehi­cles used for destroy­ing a grove – one of the few left – in Krasnodar.

‘All of the riv­er basin is in dan­ger, because these woods act as lungs for three dis­tricts: Kom­so­mol­sky, Pashkovky and Hydrostroy. In their lust for prof­it devel­op­ment com­pa­nies won’t lis­ten to locals, eco­log­i­cal sur­veys or peti­tions. So we chose to sab­o­tage their efforts.

We are mak­ing them pay,’ – ALF-Kuban

Shell — Idiots at work

Hav­ing only just start­ed work­ing on the con­tro­ver­sial tun­nel, Shel­l’s engi­neers are already fac­ing sig­nif­i­cant prob­lems.

As local peo­ple always pre­dict­ed, the doib, an unusu­al blue/grey min­er­al soil found under peat bog, is caus­ing issues.

Hav­ing only just start­ed work­ing on the con­tro­ver­sial tun­nel, Shel­l’s engi­neers are already fac­ing sig­nif­i­cant prob­lems.

As local peo­ple always pre­dict­ed, the doib, an unusu­al blue/grey min­er­al soil found under peat bog, is caus­ing issues.

This is the first time such a machine has had to deal with this unsta­ble vis­cous mate­r­i­al. This once again high­lights the exper­i­men­tal nature of the project.

Despite hav­ing tak­en more than a year to design and build, accord­ing to our sources the TBM got stuck after 30 meters hav­ing only just reached the doib. As we write there’s no end in sight for this headache.
The tun­nel and pipeline cuts right through Sruwad­da­con Bay which is a des­ig­nat­ed con­ser­va­tion site, a can­di­date Spe­cial Area of Con­ser­va­tion (SAC) and Spe­cial Pro­tec­tion Area (SPA).

Shell has insult­ing­ly named the Cor­rib TBM ‘Fion­nu­ala’ after the female of the Chil­dren of Lir, one of the leg­ends most close­ly asso­ci­at­ed with the Erris region.

Although the envi­ron­men­t’s help is wel­come, we could always use more peo­ple here. Now that the spring is here come and help make 2013 anoth­er unlucky year for Shell.

Back­ground infor­ma­tion on the tun­nel (source : Shell.ie) :

“The TBM for the Cor­rib tun­nel was designed and built in Schwanau, Ger­many by Her­renknecht, one of the world’s largest mak­ers of TBMs.”

“The tun­nel will have an exter­nal diam­e­ter of 4.2m and an inter­nal diam­e­ter of 3.5m and will run at depths of between 5.5m and 12m under Sruwad­da­con Bay”

“When con­struct­ed, the tun­nel will [if it’s built] be the longest tun­nel in Ire­land and the longest gas pipeline tun­nel any­where in Europe.”

“As the TBM moves for­ward, a series of 1.2m wide con­crete rings made up of pre­cast inter­lock­ing con­crete seg­ments is erect­ed.   These con­crete rings, which are fab­ri­cat­ed in Ire­land, will even­tu­al­ly line the entire tun­nel.”

“As the cut­ter head rotates, hydraulic cylin­ders attached to the spine of the TBM pro­pel it for­ward a few feet at a time.”

Relat­ed Link: http://www.shelltosea.com

Alexandra Park: Tree felling resumes at protest site, 8th Feb

Alexan­dra Park: Tree felling resumes at protest site
Tree felling in Alexan­dra Park, Whal­ley Range Man­ches­ter City Coun­cil said it would not be deflect­ed from its plans

Alexan­dra Park: Tree felling resumes at protest site
Tree felling in Alexan­dra Park, Whal­ley Range Man­ches­ter City Coun­cil said it would not be deflect­ed from its plans

Tree felling has resumed at a Man­ches­ter park where activists climbed trees to pre­vent the clear­ance.

The felling was pre­vent­ed last week when up to 70 peo­ple got into Alexan­dra Park, Whal­ley Range, on Thurs­day.

The pro­test­ers set up a camp and a num­ber of them scaled trees in the park.

A Man­ches­ter City Coun­cil spokesman said it would not be deflect­ed from its plans and legal action may be tak­en against the tree climbers.

Pro­tes­tor Ian Brew­er con­firmed some demon­stra­tors were still up trees but added: “There are not enough peo­ple at the camp, it is very dis­ap­point­ing.

“We’ve had good sup­port with our peti­tion but we need more peo­ple at the camp.”

The coun­cil intends to fell 280 trees as part of a £5.5m project to return the park to the way it is sup­posed to have looked in Vic­to­ri­an times.
Raised flowerbeds

The author­i­ty said only 10% of the park’s trees were being felled and local peo­ple have said they do not feel safe in the park.

But pro­test­ers claim the the actu­al num­ber of trees to be cut down is more than 400.

The trees are being removed and replaced by raised flowerbeds as part of the regen­er­a­tion of the park.

The plans also include cre­at­ing new ten­nis courts and foot­ball facil­i­ties and improve­ments to the lake.

More than 2,000 peo­ple have signed an online peti­tion oppos­ing the felling of trees in the project, which received £2.2m from the Her­itage Lot­tery Fund.

Eamonn O’Rourke, head of com­mu­ni­ties and cul­ture for Man­ches­ter City Coun­cil, said: “The actions of a small, noisy band of pro­test­ers have been hold­ing up much-need­ed improve­ments to the park which have wide­spread pub­lic sup­port and indeed all the evi­dence from our ongo­ing con­ver­sa­tions with local peo­ple sug­gest that the major­i­ty are behind the plans.“
Coun­cil plans for park The coun­cil said peo­ple did not feel safe in the park

Tim Cooke, from Hulme, who is also protest­ing against the tree felling, said: “It’s not improv­ing the park — it is destroy­ing the park by dec­i­mat­ing a third of the trees.

“I would under­stand it if they were dis­eased but they are cut­ting down per­fect­ly healthy trees.”

Greater Man­ches­ter Police con­firmed a woman was arrest­ed on Fri­day on sus­pi­cion of aggra­vat­ed tres­pass.

She was not charged but giv­en a police cau­tion.