3 ms·

They were not sent to prison for a peace protest. They were sent to prison for breaking into a nuclear facility by cutting through three fences, bypassing arme

by thrill 13y ago

They were not sent to prison for a peace protest. They were sent to prison for breaking into a nuclear facility by cutting through three fences, bypassing armed guards, and ignoring signs about the restrictions.

kiyanwang 13y ago
... that's pretty impressive for an 84 year old nun, after circumventing security at, what one might hope, is one of the securest sites in the US, they did what? sing songs, hang banners, and invite the guards to break bread and pray with them? I wonder are they being punished for what they did, or how easily they managed to do it.
ergoproxy 13y ago
The nun was convicted under the 1918 Federal Sabotage Act as amended by the 2001 PATRIOT act. Those laws were designed to deal with saboteurs, spies, and bomb making terrorists. See 18 U.S. Code § 2155 - Destruction of national-defense materials, national-defense premises, or national-defense utilities, at http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2155 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2155 Note there must be "intent to injure, interfere with, or obstruct the national defense of the United States." I don't think this nun's intention was injury, interference or obstruction. Her actions were highly symbolic: Splashing human blood, spray painting a Biblical verse, and defacing a building. In any case, there is no "right to protest." The first amendment only guarantees free speech, press, assembly, and petition for grievances. And even these "freedoms" are quite limited. OWS got tear gassed, billy clubbed and shot in the face with teargas canisters and rubber bullets for trying to exercise them. Christians have been willing to suffer this kind of persecution, go to jail, and even die for their beliefs, ever since Jesus set the example for them. Tougher laws and harsher sentences doesn't stop protest. The protests raging in Kiev right now were started by a new, tough anti-protest law. In my opinion, the nun should have been charged with trespassing, tampering and vandalism (36 CFR 1002.31). Overcharging with sabotage and terrorism really just shows prosecutorial vindictiveness. Just laws and punishments are proportional to the crime. > bypassing armed guards Sounds like the guards should lose their jobs. The security contractor should lose their contract, and maybe pay the taxpayers back whatever they were paid. They clearly failed their mission in every conceivable way. What if this had been a real terrorist instead of an 84-year old nun with a can of spraypaint, some blood and a hammer?
- gcb0 13y ago
  If the law was so badly applied, why no news outlet ever mention the judge name or defense attorney? It is clearly a case of incompetence or negligence.
  - ergoproxy 13y ago
    News coverage tends to be topical, sensational, and lazy. There's tons of detailed information about this case on this website: http://transformnowplowshares.wordpress.com/ http://transformnowplowshares.wordpress.com/ That website includes PDFs of all the legal motions, memos, declarations and arguments made in the case: http://transformnowplowshares.wordpress.com/legal-arguments/ http://transformnowplowshares.wordpress.com/legal-arguments/ Reviewing these documents, we see that the 3 defendants were initially indicted for "malicious mischief" on 7-Aug-2012, under 18 U.S. Code § 1363. But a superceding indictment filed on 4-Dec-2012 upgraded the charges to "sabotage" under 18 U.S. Code § 2155.
- zimpenfish 13y ago
  Can't tell if there was only one guard or whether they were off-site. "The activists, who got past fences and security sensors before dawn on July 28, apparently spent several hours in the Y-12 National Security Complex before they were stopped — by a lone guard, they told friends — as they used a Bible and candles in a Christian peace ritual."[1] Either way, if it was a real terrorist, they'd likely have several tons of "highly enriched uranium" now. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/08/us/pacifists-who-broke-into-nuclear-weapon-facility-due-in-court.html http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/08/us/pacifists-who-broke-int...
ck2 13y ago
There were no guards on the site and they sat and ate sandwiches while waiting for them to arrive much later. "Breaking in" was just walking through an easily made hole in a fence. They should be paid for pen-testing the facility which was obviously never done.

by thrill 13y ago

kiyanwang 13y ago

... that's pretty impressive for an 84 year old nun, after circumventing security at, what one might hope, is one of the securest sites in the US, they did what? sing songs, hang banners, and invite the guards to break bread and pray with them? I wonder are they being punished for what they did, or how easily they managed to do it.

ergoproxy 13y ago

The nun was convicted under the 1918 Federal Sabotage Act as amended by the 2001 PATRIOT act. Those laws were designed to deal with saboteurs, spies, and bomb making terrorists. See 18 U.S. Code § 2155 - Destruction of national-defense materials, national-defense premises, or national-defense utilities, at http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2155 http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2155 Note there must be "intent to injure, interfere with, or obstruct the national defense of the United States." I don't think this nun's intention was injury, interference or obstruction. Her actions were highly symbolic: Splashing human blood, spray painting a Biblical verse, and defacing a building. In any case, there is no "right to protest." The first amendment only guarantees free speech, press, assembly, and petition for grievances. And even these "freedoms" are quite limited. OWS got tear gassed, billy clubbed and shot in the face with teargas canisters and rubber bullets for trying to exercise them. Christians have been willing to suffer this kind of persecution, go to jail, and even die for their beliefs, ever since Jesus set the example for them. Tougher laws and harsher sentences doesn't stop protest. The protests raging in Kiev right now were started by a new, tough anti-protest law. In my opinion, the nun should have been charged with trespassing, tampering and vandalism (36 CFR 1002.31). Overcharging with sabotage and terrorism really just shows prosecutorial vindictiveness. Just laws and punishments are proportional to the crime. > bypassing armed guards Sounds like the guards should lose their jobs. The security contractor should lose their contract, and maybe pay the taxpayers back whatever they were paid. They clearly failed their mission in every conceivable way. What if this had been a real terrorist instead of an 84-year old nun with a can of spraypaint, some blood and a hammer?

gcb0 13y ago
If the law was so badly applied, why no news outlet ever mention the judge name or defense attorney? It is clearly a case of incompetence or negligence.
- ergoproxy 13y ago
  News coverage tends to be topical, sensational, and lazy. There's tons of detailed information about this case on this website: http://transformnowplowshares.wordpress.com/ http://transformnowplowshares.wordpress.com/ That website includes PDFs of all the legal motions, memos, declarations and arguments made in the case: http://transformnowplowshares.wordpress.com/legal-arguments/ http://transformnowplowshares.wordpress.com/legal-arguments/ Reviewing these documents, we see that the 3 defendants were initially indicted for "malicious mischief" on 7-Aug-2012, under 18 U.S. Code § 1363. But a superceding indictment filed on 4-Dec-2012 upgraded the charges to "sabotage" under 18 U.S. Code § 2155.
zimpenfish 13y ago
Can't tell if there was only one guard or whether they were off-site. "The activists, who got past fences and security sensors before dawn on July 28, apparently spent several hours in the Y-12 National Security Complex before they were stopped — by a lone guard, they told friends — as they used a Bible and candles in a Christian peace ritual."[1] Either way, if it was a real terrorist, they'd likely have several tons of "highly enriched uranium" now. [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/08/us/pacifists-who-broke-into-nuclear-weapon-facility-due-in-court.html http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/08/us/pacifists-who-broke-int...

ck2 13y ago

There were no guards on the site and they sat and ate sandwiches while waiting for them to arrive much later. "Breaking in" was just walking through an easily made hole in a fence. They should be paid for pen-testing the facility which was obviously never done.