Thanks for admitting that you operate completely within your own anomic, normative bubble. But I would caution you not to confuse what RAN’s ethical/moral code is with that of larger society, because the social-psychological weight and inertia of the latter, as reflected in the larger discretion of judges and juries, will eventually crush you if you continue to skirt its boundaries. That’s why I mentioned consulting with a disinterested civil rights expert like Avery S. Friedman. Someone with his background can put it all into perspective for you. I only keep mentioning the justice system because, although people like me can withdraw our support for RAN, the former will eventually bring you into line through the long reach of due process of law, whether it be civil, criminal, equitable or administrative in nature, should you continue to flout it.

Since you mention it, ethics (much like logic) is an entire branch of philosophy that is guided by norms and mores that originate outside of RAN, too.

Consider and balance the interests of all who are affected by your actions.

Thanks for contributing to the intellectual diversity of my retirement, regardless of how banal it may appear.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I need to strategize about how I’m going to snatch some petty little punk through his backside for skimming my gratuities with a heavy hand.

____________________________________________________

P.S.: I like your independent attitude, but you can’t ignore the fact that pay backs are a bitch. Please don’t think I’m not empathetic about the backlash you have to deal with. Even though I take a perverse enjoyment in Larry Flint’s exposés, I’ve had to put up with the sex industry’s amateurish antics over some bogus business interruption claims I put the spotlight on, and I’ve had to deal with a bunch of ethnic-based crime organizations for squelching their rent-a-patient scams. Actually, when it comes to big money being laundered through legitimate investments, at some level all these crooks sleep in the same bed; the beast is more like a multi-headed hydra.

We operate by our own non-violent ethical code. When governments and industry refuse to take responsibility, who will hold them accountable? Groups like NRDC do great work in the courts; we work in the streets. Given the stakes, both approaches are more than justified.

You know what? This culture is evolving a let’s-see-what-we can-get-away-with”-ethos, and now I’m just happy to deliver sandwiches and live on my litigation settlements.

Don’t be so paranoid. I’m not the one who’s obsessed. I signed a bunch of your petitions and supported your symbolic demonstrations up until you guys crossed the line with barricading Citi’s doors. In fact, I thought scaling that crane and hanging a banner off of it was downright gutsy. But I’m not just going to let you tap dance around the issue and think you’re going to bamboozle me into going away.

To be fair, if someone built a coal-fired power plant and spewed fossil fuel effluent into my backyard (thus imperiling my health and property value), I would get medieval on their cases too, and barricading their doors would be the least of their concerns. But I’m neither going to interfere in the banking transactions of their financiers customers, nor force their tellers and clerks to leave work early.

Get a sense of perspective and proportionality, and step outside of your self-centered perception of your own self-importance. I doubt I’m alone in how others see you. I’m just a more vocal representative of people who believe that First Amendment causes have their legitimate limitations and boundaries.

Are you a police officer, a former police officer or merely a private security agent? I kind of feel like I am conversing with an agent of the state when I read your posts. Looking at your myspace profile a bit closer, I see your background is a law enforcement background.

Tell me, who are you working for? Which government or corporate entity that will “mess us up” pays your rent?

Inquiring minds want to know.

According to Bloomberg (reputable financial news service) Citi is the top underwriter for the coal industry. The connection to the Washington DC branch is that Citi’s business whether in the corporate suites or in branches in towns and neighborhoods throughout the country funds coal mining and combustion. Our strategy is to increase pressure on their brand, public image and reputation amongst their customer base. You can take the issues of mountaintop removal and coal plants to the courts or Congress or you can take it to their financiers.

It’s obvious that you’re so enamored with your ideological justifications and ends/means rationalizations that you can’t be reasoned with. You’ve evolved this self-serving belief system that wraps you in some sort of self-righteous cocoon of moralistic superiority, which obviates any introspective analysis of social accountability.

You really should be thinking about what you’ve said (quoted below) very hard, and then try presenting it to a scientifically convened, mock jury. Then you’d see how they would react to you barricading their places of work. Remember, however, real-life juries also hear from plaintiff attorneys and prosecutors. But somehow I doubt that you’re impressed in the slightest by what your detractors think.

According to Bloomberg (reputable financial news service) Citi is the top underwriter for the coal industry. The connection to the Washington DC branch is that Citi’s business whether in the corporate suites or in branches in towns and neighborhoods throughout the country funds coal mining and combustion. Our strategy is to increase pressure on their brand, public image and reputation amongst their customer base. You can take the issues of mountaintop removal and coal plants to the courts or Congress or you can take it to their financiers.

It’s obvious by this logic that you would not concern yourselves in the slightest with any sense of proportionate, rational relationship between your response to the source, intensity, frequency and duration of your perceived threat and the site of your protest. You simply paint with a broad brush and label any branch office fair game (which, for solely First Amendment purposes is not disputed), while completely disregarding how your actual behavior (as opposed to mere symbolism) affects the people who work in those branch offices, or what their perceived degree of culpability actually bears to the gravamen of your grievance. This is an incredible position to take on the issue. Please disabuse me if you have not expressed yourself so as to not be misunderstood.

Moving on … so, what are we, the non-indoctrinated, supposed to think of you? Are you well-intentioned thugs? Are you misguided zealots like the abortion clinic bombers, but simply avoid extremes? It’s quite obvious that you’ve rationalized away tortious conduct, so what’s next, criminal damage to property? And what after that? Are you going to kidnap Citi’s Wash. DC branch manager for a prison exchange once some of you land in jail? Where does this rationalization scheme of “direct action” end?

You don’t like the characterizations, punk, thug, zealot, or rogue? Try convict. Try probationer. Try parolee. How do they resonate with your narcissistic, immature and irresponsible world view? No doubt, some of you would consider them a badge of honor. Get a clue: Stop pointing your fingers at the misdeeds of commerce and industry as justification for your own. To do so is tantamount to tu quoque fallious reasoning. We, the people, will deal with them, as well as their errant if not corrupt government cronies, separately. Your First Amendment rights end where the rights of person and property begin. Like Clint Eastwood’s character “dirty Harry” said, “A man’s got to know his limitations.” I know I’ve reached the limits of my patience with your dogma.

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2004/05/31/370717/index.htm

The Ecologist
Rainforest Action Network: the inspiring group bringing corporate America to its senses

http://ran.org/media_center/news_article/?uid=1849

Both of these are linked from our front page, incidentally.

Regardless,

“What did the people working in Citi’s Washington, DC branch have to do with coal mining and pollution? I doubt that you really know, much less appear to care.”

According to Bloomberg (reputable financial news service) Citi is the top underwriter for the coal industry. The connection to the Washington DC branch is that Citi’s business whether in the corporate suites or in branches in towns and neighborhoods throughout the country funds coal mining and combustion. Our strategy is to increase pressure on their brand, public image and reputation amongst their customer base. You can take the issues of mountaintop removal and coal plants to the courts or Congress or you can take it to their financiers.

Investment bankers are making millions off of funding the coal industry.

Please read this briefing on the interconnections between Wall Street, the coal extractors and the utility companies. http://ran.org/fileadmin/materials/global_finance/publications/Banks_Climate_Change_and_US_Coal_Rush.pdf

When our campaign started it was out of the realization that direct pressure on oil companies or coal companies had limited results. What are you going to do, ask an oil company to stop drilling for oil? So instead we began looking a secondary targets. Namely those targets that provide the extractor’s projects and loans-the banks. If you research our history and our earned media, it’s a very effective strategy. The banks are susceptible to brand attacks and are very willing to change their environmental policies. We care very much about shifting the global economy and understand the role in which we play in that change.

As far as provoking the government or banking industry’s ire, we’ve been down that road multiple times and can handle it without your comments.

Sparki

The Natural Resources Defense Council also intervenes directly, and effectively, through the use of the courts. They know how to choose their venues and their battles. They also know how to work the system without abrogating other people’s property rights either tortiously or otherwise illegally. My historical recollection is that Martin Luther King marched on Washington, DC. He did not occupy the doorways of Washington, DC office buildings. Save that for where it is appropriate so that those you may eventually need to call upon for support will be inclined to do so without compunction.

If RAN runs afoul of the law long enough, eventually, it’s going to have to pay the piper, and, no doubt, at the expense of your “bigger strategic campaigns”. I hope you all enjoy the dance. Truly, your Washington, DC stunt demeans RAN’s credibility. Much like mafia dons, commerce and industry execute their dirty work through a murky network of unsavory intermediaries so as not to sully themselves. Hint: Two can play at that game, but you’re going to have to get out of the sandlot, or, should I say coal chute, first.

Regardless, your most recent post is the most well-written position statement that I have read on this blog topic. You represent your cause well, albeit a bit demagogically. I tend to be more pedantic. ;-) I think we’re done here.

If you punks keep pulling stunts like Citi Wash. DC, you’ll probably be put under surveillance if not infiltrated, your phones and data communications will be intercepted (there are plenty of P.I.’s who can and will do almost anything for the right price), you’ll be set up, and then you’ll get messed up. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the more militant among you (if not your friends and relatives as well) get overtly harassed or otherwise become objects of intimidation strategies.

RAN has been at this for 20 years, and your predictions are in fact our present. But we understand how to operate in this environment; it really does come with the territory.

We don’t depend on the courts or the government. Our campaigns seek to directly intervene on corporate misbehavior; actions like the one in DC are part of bigger strategic campaigns. Over the past two decades, we’ve been able to bring enough pressure to bear to force target after target to the negotiating table. Our base consists of people who realize that these interventions are necessary, and it is growing. Given our record of success, perhaps it is you that should “wise up.”

You guys all sound like you’re still in your 20′s if not your late teens. Why don’t you consult someone like Avery S. Friedman (http://www.martindale.com/Avery-S-Friedman/1435874-lawyer.htm), one of the nation’s more prominent civil rights lawyers, who can put this all into perspective for you.

Multinational, mega-corporate banking institutions and energy conglomerates fight back mean and dirty in largely insidious and untraceable ways. They have Dick Cheney in their pockets to protect them, need I say more? Just ask Greg Palast if you don’t believe me. If you punks keep pulling stunts like Citi Wash. DC, you’ll probably be put under surveillance if not infiltrated, your phones and data communications will be intercepted (there are plenty of P.I.’s who can and will do almost anything for the right price), you’ll be set up, and then you’ll get messed up. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the more militant among you (if not your friends and relatives as well) get overtly harassed or otherwise become objects of intimidation strategies.

Some of this goes with the territory, but your largest loss will be the support of “a jury of your peers” (e.g., people like me), because God knows the courts and the Justice Dept. are stacked against you. Wise up. Gaining publicity and a sympathetic public opinion for your cause is the only long-term strategy that is going to influence the system in your favor. Don’t squander it on a few moments of bluster and bravado.

Sparki