In Manifesto, Mexican Eco-Terrorists Declare War on Nanotechnology

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 04:53 PM
link   
I have never heard of these people before, but apparently they are trying to kill scientists in Mexico for years already. I searched ATS and found nothing about this, so I decided to share the story...


In Manifesto, Mexican Eco-Terrorists Declare War on Nanotechnology


Over the past two years, Mexican scientists involved in bio- and nanotechnology have become targets. They’re not threatened by the nation’s drug cartels. They’re marked for death by a group of bomb-building eco-terrorists with the professed goal of destroying human civilization.

A violent fringe group with anarcho-primitivist views — its name roughly translates to “Individuals Tending to Savagery,” although “Tending to the Wild” might be more exact — ITS sees technology and civilization as essentially doomed and leading humanity to an ecological catastrophe. Technology should be destroyed; humans should revert to a hunter-gatherer lifestyle; and all of this, ITS says, is for our own good. Nanotechnology is a particular scourge: Self-replicating nanobots will one day escape from laboratories to consume the Earth; and weaponization of nanotech is inevitable.


Here's a Google translation of their website... With a lot of weirdness in it... liberaciontotal.laha... ine.org/%253Fp%253D4945%26hl%3Den&sa=X&ei=ppw_UfvNOKGu2QXy3YC4AQ&ved=0CDYQ7gEwAA" target="_blank" class="postlink">Liberacion Total




posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 05:02 PM
link   
Great idea and feelings. Downright evil application and focus of efforts, in my humble opinion.

We all hate Monsanto for the GMO toxin they are polluting life itself with among some segments of the food chain. However, do you go attack the corn farmer in Iowa or the Wheat farmer in Nebraska? Of course not. Monsanto will simply sell to the next farmer down the pike and not much care about the one targeted for using GMO seed.

In this case, it's worse. Farmer experience core doesn't mean much to public safety. At least not like it does in Science. Kill the top names in Nanotech, and you've not done a thing to slow Nano-tech efforts, just outcomes. It's forced the "B" team for competence and ability to replace the "A" team people who get hit in the effort or crossfire. Bad bad approach.

Like Monsanto on seed, the people actually contracting the research done and paying the tabs for the labs and grants to do all the work aren't phased by replacing labor....which is what the scientists are from the top, looking down IMO. Just hired help and labor to fill contractual agreements. Highly educated contracted labor..but still.



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Some of us actually believe in genetic modification and the application of nanotechnology.

It is the future and will make us a better species.

Once millions of people are dropping dead from GMO foods then maybe we can talk about the dangers.
edit on 12-3-2013 by Hopechest because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 05:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Hopechest
 


Well, I'd even agree with you. GMO and Nano-tech hold the keys to a brilliant and truly wondrous future. The problem is, in their other hand, they hold the keys to Pandora's box. We can't un-invent either, at any rate and people will work the technology. So...We can do it with extreme caution which may require extreme regulation on a world wide treaty basis with teeth that cuts steel......or we can hope for the best as everyone trials and errors it.

The major nightmare is? They only get one big mistake. Just one...and it's game over for millions. Perhaps billions. One Nano-bugger gone wrong or self-replicating out of lab control ... or one GMO consequence making a new variation where no one expected, to change nourishment to toxin.

I agree it's the future ...but a one with promise or one with endless horror gets determined by how it's done, IMO.



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Your expressing an old fear people have about new technology and I could show you example after example of theories about why this or that should not be pursued. Here is an old article from 1900 about the fear of developing electricity.


ELECTRIFIED PORTSMOUTH, NH BRIGHT IDEA IN 1900?
JANUARY 1900
A Reporter's Notebook


As 1900 dawns, the Seacoast faces a shocking new technology. Is electricity safe? Is it just another toy for the rich? Do we really need it when gas lights work just fine and horses are easier to ride than cars? Should we develop this new science or leave the genie in the bulb?

Electric, electric, electric! The way people bandy that word about nowadays, you'd think electricity is the new salvation of mankind. That attitude is particularly "on the wire" this week as the Old Town by the Sea hurtles relentlessly from the comfortably familiar 19th century into the unknown landscape of the 20th.

This writer, however, urges caution as we contemplate the coming Electric Age, admonishing readers not to entertain Utopian flights of fancy. Certainly this modern miracle has its usefulness, but for every labor-saving benefit, electricity brings us -- something, we fear, is lost in the trade.


www.seacoastnh.com.../



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Hopechest
 

I'm sorry but that's ridiculous. My concerns and very strong suspicion of Genetically Modified food crops and other life forms as well as Nano-technology too small to see or manipulate without the most advanced of specialized equipment do not make me a Luddite.

I think playing God with the crops that sustain life for our planet's food is incredibly foolish and ignores a long history of what happens when strains of seed become too uniform and lose diversity. Nature finds a way to plague the one ...which then plagues far out of proportion to anything that should have been possible. They claim GMO can't see this happen. Yeah..and the Titanic was unsinkable too. lol...

Nanotech isn't foolish, is the arrogance and hubris of man at it's ultimate. We're building complex little machines that can, in theory, become VERY complex and sophisticated for task driven operation ...and at a level that we can't stop without the very tech used to create it. Very high tech that, if God Forbid, the talent to operate wasn't around to use ....we couldn't easily figure out to turn something off.

I'm sure many disagree with my logic for why I wish we COULD un-invent the tech for another few generations at least but blind fear of change isn't a part of it. The concerns are quite specific in context to each, actually.



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Would you like to see articles about the fear of going into space and bringing back disease? How about the invention of the atomic weapon, certain medical creations such as various vaccines, the automobile causing mass death, the list is virtually endless.

People fear what they do not know and its natural. Eventually nano-tech and genetic modification will be commonplace and the fears will not have realized.

Humans are constantly on the edge of multiple types of self-destruction but that's no reason not to proceed. Lets just try to be cautious.

After all, if we lived through the horrific inventions that came out of the industrial revolution, I think we can make it.



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Hopechest
 

Hopechest, I think this is getting downright off topic. You can't show me articles that say *MY* feelings come from what you insist they do and that's all that has been said, claimed or matters in this context. Why argue everything and every position others have, no matter the basis or position?

It's a figurative argument taken to me as a specific example and it's a fail in all ways. I'm off... Sorry OP.. I find your thread really interesting although tactics are what I have the issue with. S/F over all!



posted on Mar, 12 2013 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Hopechest
 





After all, if we lived through the horrific inventions that came out of the industrial revolution, I think we can make it.


I wonder if the people who lived through Hiroshima and Nagasaki or the people trying to live thought the "humanitarian" missions our government is conducting in the Middle East would agree with you on this one...



posted on Mar, 14 2013 @ 07:02 AM
link   
reply to post by Hopechest
 


If you cannot see the dangers in nanotech... Then there's no point in having a conversation with you about it,.frankly. Yeah, people were worried about nukes and still are... Two cities already got wiped off the map from nukes, so clearly they have a good reason. And when all these nuclear power plants need maintanance and decommissioning and there's nobody who can afford to do it or knows how to do it, then you won't be so careless. But then it will be too late.

I wonder how many deaths have been caused from, or in part by, electricity? Yes, these fears are real and based in fact. I'm not saying we should give.up electricity. I'm not saying we should never pursue nanotech. But if you cannot see that you are making a trade and that technology is always a double edged sword, then like I said, intelligent people like Wrabbit should not waste their time talking to you about it.

And lastly... Your arguments are RIDICULOUS... OK?

People were afraid of electricity once upon a time so that means there is no danger in pursuing nanotech or any technology. ??? Huh? How are the two related again? They are both technological advancements, that's about it. So, you're lumping in all tech advancement into a pile and label it "safe" and "100% good"? My God man, listen.to yourself!!



posted on Mar, 14 2013 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by 3n19m470

If you cannot see the dangers in nanotech... Then there's no point in having a conversation with you about it,.frankly. Yeah, people were worried about nukes and still are... Two cities already got wiped off the map from nukes, so clearly they have a good reason.




Agreed.

GMO, nanotech, nukes are exceptionally powerful technology. But when we combine this kind of science with the criminally mindless behaviors of current corporations and governments, we have a serious potential to severely damage the earth.

I'm told Monsanto is now (trying to?) move their GMO corn into Mexico in a very big way. As you know, corn is a major staple of Mexican diet. If Monsanto is successful, I've got a thousand dollars that says tumors and cancers will sky rocket in Mexico.

As far as this "eco-terrorist" group is concerned, don't be too sure that what you're reading is true. The major corporations have a vested interest in making anti-GMO, anti-tech groups look bad. I'd trust a google translation as far as I could throw it. If it is a real extremist group, is it possible that it was created by Monsanto (or other darkside organizations) to create the public meme "opposition to GMO is terrorism"?

Today, all the world really is a stage.



posted on Mar, 14 2013 @ 09:11 AM
link   
again the human habit of blaming the tools and not the handler.

Keeping these powerful tools away from megalomaniacs should be the goal, not stifling our progress as a collective species.



posted on Mar, 14 2013 @ 03:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by FuturePeace
again the human habit of blaming the tools and not the handler.

Keeping these powerful tools away from megalomaniacs should be the goal, not stifling our progress as a collective species.


I agree, but megalomaniacs are the ones that are financing the development and completely controlling the use of these powerful tools.



posted on Mar, 21 2013 @ 01:50 AM
link   
It is the future and will make us a better species.

Once millions of people are dropping dead from GMO foods then maybe we can talk about the dangers.


could do





top topics
 
3

log in

join