"Eco-terrorism, is it a legitimate political process?"
Um, lemme see, is regular terrorism a legitimate political process? No? It's not okay to blow the shit out of people because they disagree with you about religion/abortion/whatever? It's not? Well, then, I think you have your answer.
How the HELL does there need to be a discussion on this topic? I mean REALLY.
Which brings me to a story:
About two weeks after we moved up here, The Husband and I were walking around just seeing what we could see. As we were crossing the street, this woman who looked like every joke about a Portland hippie I'd ever heard (layered skirts, tye-dye, dreams, lots of wooden bracelets, pentagram necklace, and doc martens), walked up to us and asked, "Do you have time to talk about the environment?"
"I won't bite! I'm just a peaceful person. I want to talk to you about GreenPeace."
I laughed in her face. Not on purpose, and not to start shit, but just from the sheer surprise that she had the balls to put "peaceful" and "Greenpeace" in the same thought. The guy who started Greenpeace left in disgust because their motives got violent. You know, like blowing up tankers and shit.
So, I suppose there needs to be a discussion on whether eco-terrorism is legit politically because there are people who identify themselves as peaceful Greenpeace types. Maybe they're not blowing shit up because they're assholes. Maybe that woman just tries to talk to people about the organization. But you know what? She's blatantly supporting an organization that BLOWS PEOPLE UP. And last I checked, blowing people and their property up is, in fact, one of the ways terrorism occurs. It's the equivalent of an anti-gay senator getting caught with a cock in his mouth.