MLPA HELP! By Sept. 24, 2010. Please send in your email.

[bmercury]

Originally Posted by Billy V

environmental terrorist

Pretty sure that you understand there is an actual need for conservation.

When you call someone that disagrees with you over a matter of policy a "terrorist" that makes it impossible to ever find any sort of compromise or common ground. Not cool.

Also, no one that is in the middle or sitting on the fence will ever take you seriously.

[kurt]

Pretty sure that you understand there is an actual need for conservation.

Conservation, yes. Closures, no thanks. Many states are able to regulate fishing with slot limits, closing certain species for certain seasons, etc. In other words, well thought out, scientific based regulations. Not a Keep Out sign.

[Tman]

Originally Posted by bmercury

Pretty sure that you understand there is an actual need for conservation.

When you call someone that disagrees with you over a matter of policy a "terrorist" that makes it impossible to ever find any sort of compromise or common ground. Not cool.

Also, no one that is in the middle or sitting on the fence will ever take you seriously.

Wow...sorry, have to chime in and disagree with you, obviously you did not attend a single meeting. It was cordial up front at the beginning even though I had an insider tell me that we were about to be "RR'd".

As the meetings progressed, it was obvious that some people did not play by the rules. Even in War you have Rules of Engagement.

We, kayakers, spearfishers, boaters, shorefishers, all agreed there needed to be conservation. We did all we could to compromise without losing vital fishing grounds. We gave areas in hopes of keeping certain areas. We even suggested slot limits. All fell on deaf ears, they had an agenda and planned, yes planned, to make sure their agenda would be met.

Terrorists are funded. Someone supplies them with the weapons, they don't play by the rules. Maybe calling an eco-friendly environmental a terrorist is a bit harsh, I'll give you that. But, had you been at some of the meetings, it would be very likely that your stance would definitely sway, especially watching groups come together with agreed upon compromises, a closure here, full closure there, to keep certain fishable areas open.

Then, swoosh comes the rug from under your legs, it's suddenly, as in without notice, decided that the whole process was wrong and needed to be done over again. A key member of the BRTF would suddenly admit it was his fault, and the whole process would need to be 'reevaluated'.

New lines would have to be drawn up, even though they had 'insufficient data' to move forward. The 'insufficient data' would be included in the process, even though it wasn't thoroughly evaluated. The best part was how, even though this was supposed to be an open forum, as in, a fair and open process, that was not to be.

Speaking time was cut short, interrupted, or the speaker was admonished by the chairman for speaking his thoughts. We were told that we had to be 'courteous' in our speeches or we would be cut off. So much for free speech. Meanwhile, the conservationists were allowed to speak first (before the certain board members, er, bored members, got bored), school children bused in as class assignments and told what to say, probably for extra credit, even though when offered a free half-day fishing pass hands shot up in the air.

And the beauty of it, the absolute beauty of it all, when we showed up at one meeting wearing black shirts as a sign of unity, we were the ones branded as using 'threatening and intimidating' antics, only to see in subsequent meetings the 'other side' handing out t-shirts stating MLPA's Work, even though no MLPA's had been in force.

So let's do a recap...

It is well known that the MLPA process is funded. Look it up, do some research, and you will find the power players behind it...

It is also well known that certain members of the BRTF are on other boards...again, look it up.

It is also well known that certain members were relegated to other positions regarding their views of this whole process, with others put in place who agreed to take on the task of accomplishing the funded mission. Translation = they didn't do a good job.

It was also quite obvious that the issue was not about the Clean Water Act as it was supposed to be about. Kind of like the Somali pirates who say they are protecting their fishing grounds from outsiders, yet hijack cruise ships. Or oil tankers.

And it was indeed quite obvious that it was not about fishing conservation when you have key members of the Laguna Beach community explicitly state that they don't like to see kayakers, boaters, spearfishers disrupting their entitled right to view the ocean.

So let's see...a terrorist is funded, doesn't play by the rules, and uses whatever means necessary to achieve their goal, all based on having the same viewpoint of their benefactor.

So maybe 'terrorists' was too strong of a word...please enlighten us on a new word to call them so that we may submit it to Noah Webster...

[WahooUSMA]

Originally Posted by Tman

So let's see...a terrorist is funded, doesn't play by the rules, and uses whatever means necessary to achieve their goal, all based on having the same viewpoint of their benefactor.

I don't know what other word I would use? I think you and Billy hit it on the head, and your interpretation of a terrorist is pretty damn accurate.

[Jzo]

Done!

[AquaticHunter]

Originally Posted by bmercury

Also, no one that is in the middle or sitting on the fence will ever take you seriously.

I'm done trying to play footsies with these people. One of the MLPA meetings I went to in Long Beach, the terrorists shipped in High School children who had no idea why they were there.

Most people outside of our fishing circles who hear about the MLPA are instantly on our side. They think it's amazing the government is even considering what the enviro terrorists wackos have proposed, let alone already passed it.

One post on my FB page generated 87 signatures against the MLPA and I only have 120 "friends." That's why I've proposed a ballot initiative to uphold our constitution and protect fishing. We would win that battle.

[bmercury]

Terrorists are people that kill innocents for political reasons, not people with whom you have a policy disagreement. Do you guys remember 9/11, the sniper shootings, subway gas attack in japan, suicide bombings in Israel etc?

Did these environmentalists ever kill anyone here in california during the MLPA process? Did they even try? If so I will reconsider.

Now that you have dehumanized these people and deemed them "terrorists". What are you going to do to them if your favorite fishing spot is closed? Go on a killing spree because they are "terrorists" and therefore fair game? That will sure show them who the terrorist is!

By your criteria I could call people who are advocating for insurance companies to be able to deny health care to children "terrorists". Or people who are advocating for apartheid against homosexuals, immigrants etc "terrorists". These sorts of people have used the same tactics which you describe. Those are in my opinion much more damaging views than wanting to disrupt my hobby.

But I would not, they are simply people with whom I have a policy disagreement.

[Billy V]

Letters Sent.

[Grego]

Hi Billy Martin, you scare me with your edumacation

[AquaticHunter]

Originally Posted by bmercury

they are simply people with whom I have a policy disagreement.

Question... is that what you say to people who cut you off on the road?

Do you really have a policy disagreement with them? Did you attend a single MLPA meeting? Did you send in your letter?

[Regor]

Letter sent.

[Ohana]

Sent it out!

My 2 cents regarding the discussion of whether to call those pushing the all restrictive MLPA plan environmental terrorists: A terrorist is a person or group who uses terrorism (bombing, murder of civilians, etc...) as a means of coercion to obtain their objectives, so if these environmental groups start killing people opposed to their views or other violent methods to create fear and sway peoples opinions, then they are terrorists. To my knowledge they have not exhibited this behavior.

Now, they do behave in a manner that fits an extremists behavior, so I prefer to call them environmental extremists. They are using fanatical and excessive behavior to push their agenda, but have not resorted to terrorism.

Kevin

[Billy V]

I don't know if I agree... Miriam Webster doesn't say anything about Killing , Murder, etc. in order to qualify as a Terrorist.

terrorist |ˈterərist|
noun
a person who uses terrorism in the pursuit of political aims.
DERIVATIVES
terroristic |ˌterəˈristik| |ˈtɛrəˈrɪstɪk| |-ˈrɪstɪk| adjective
terroristically |ˈtɛrəˈrɪst1k(ə)li| |-ˈrɪstɪk(ə)li| adverb
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Heres the Thesaurus as well.

terrorist
noun
the detainees are suspected terrorists extremist, fanatic; revolutionary, radical, insurgent, guerrilla, anarchist, freedom fighter; bomber, gunman, assassin, hijacker, arsonist, incendiary.

-Notice here how she links the noun/and subsequent adjective.

This is a tough call.
Can we agree to define them as rat bast*rds as previously noted ?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

More on this after dinner.

[Grego]

Here go those Eco-nazi extremist terrorist again !! Gotta love their graffiti!! such environmentally friendly creatures they are....(Photo Courtesy of Dxrat from BT...good job capturing their behavior Dave even if you do peddle!)

Call them what you want, I call them M*th%@ F*$&@, but it doesn't literally mean they fornicate their moms....get over it and express your distaste for them however you want, just don't break the law...LIKE THEY DO!!

[blackcloud9]

Done...

[Ohana]

Originally Posted by Billy V

I don't know if I agree... Miriam Webster doesn't say anything about Killing , Murder, etc. in order to qualify as a Terrorist.

terrorist |ˈterərist|
noun
a person who uses terrorism in the pursuit of political aims.
DERIVATIVES
terroristic |ˌterəˈristik| |ˈtɛrəˈrɪstɪk| |-ˈrɪstɪk| adjective
terroristically |ˈtɛrəˈrɪst1k(ə)li| |-ˈrɪstɪk(ə)li| adverb
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Heres the Thesaurus as well.

terrorist
noun
the detainees are suspected terrorists extremist, fanatic; revolutionary, radical, insurgent, guerrilla, anarchist, freedom fighter; bomber, gunman, assassin, hijacker, arsonist, incendiary.

-Notice here how she links the noun/and subsequent adjective.

This is a tough call.
Can we agree to define them as rat bast*rds as previously noted ?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

More on this after dinner.

I agree that the use of rat ba*$@rds is more appropriate

[jhook]

Originally Posted by bmercury

Now that you have dehumanized these people and deemed them "terrorists". What are you going to do to them if your favorite fishing spot is closed? Go on a killing spree because they are "terrorists" and therefore fair game? That will sure show them who the terrorist is!

By your criteria I could call people who are advocating for insurance companies to be able to deny health care to children "terrorists". Or people who are advocating for apartheid against homosexuals, immigrants etc "terrorists". These sorts of people have used the same tactics which you describe. Those are in my opinion much more damaging views than wanting to disrupt my hobby.

But I would not, they are simply people with whom I have a policy disagreement.

[sarcasm]Good to know you would never resort to hyperbole or demonizing people with whom you have a policy disagreement.[/sarcasm]

While I agree with you that labeling these people terrorists is counterproductive, it's pretty clear that they are not just well-meaning opponents arguing their position in good faith. They'll use any dirty tactics they can get away with and they are very well funded and organized.

Maybe you could direct some of that anger at the other side. While it's just a hobby to you, there are plenty of people who's livelihood depends on recreational fishing. I'm sure they would appreciate your help.

[kurt]

DFG Commissioner Richards went off on the Governor.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2...aises-doubts-/

My favorite quote:

“This just shows how corrupt this process is,” Richards said. “This process, the Marine Life Protection Act, is so corrupt, so offensive it’s unimaginable. Gov. Schwarzenegger is a forked-tongue devil.”

[Tman]

Ooooh, thanks for that Kurt.

Nice to see that the Packard foundation may ultimately have thrown away alot of $ and the terminator is now caught up in his true actions...

Richards said he is speaking out because Schwarzenegger can’t do anything to him like he did to Sutsos.
“I’m confirmed, and he can’t pull me off the Commission,” Richards said. “He’s stuck with me.”

Richards predicted that the MLPA closures will be overturned in court once all the corruption is exposed that went on with the process. He said a judge will look at the lack of time given for the environmental document in the South Coast Region and throw the document out.

[JoeBeck]

I sent a letter and this is really the 1st political process I got involved in to the point where I was going to meetings, sending out letters, emails, calling my representatives and in the end the corruption left a very bitter taste in my mouth where I have lost so much trust in our government process and the land of the free we live in. The dismissal of Sutsos confirms the corruption more. Although I witnessed it in person and really don't need anymore confimation.

I don't care what you call them terrorist, extremist, far left wingers, mother fu*&a's or anything else! It has been a corrupt process from the beginning that needs to be set right. I know many of us fishermen would have considered ourselves or still do environmentalist, people who care for our natural resources and are for conservation. We are reasonable people and understand slot limits, seasons, closures to endangered species and proven fishing and hunting conservation methods that have worked well in our other states. Not this way, Not through corruption and funding from extremist, not through manipulation to the system, financial interest, backroom politics, politicians in bed with each-other working to make each-other more rich, Not through closing our ocean to individuals who use it in a low impact method and pay our taxes and license fees to help support its health.

Sorry bmercury there is more than political disagreement going on here, these people are doing all in their power to attack our livelihood. Not going to happen on this board!