|
Seems like hyperbole to me mixedmedia.
My thought is that whatever economic damage greenpeace has caused (repainting the ship, salaries and operating costs of the ship for the time it was detained) should be repaid by greenpeace. I can't think of a sensical reason for them not to be liable. Maybe they don't pay indirect costs like lost sales, but direct costs seem like a no brainer to me.
And will, your definition of violence seems strained - I doubt you'd argue about the emotional violence inflicted by racism.
__________________
Cogito ergo spud -- I think, therefore I yam
|