One of the things that always cracks me up is when the actions of people trying to make statements have the opposite of the desired effect.  The latest eco-terrorism attack in Washington DC was clearly a great example of this.  In a very liberal hybrid driving neighborhood, Gareth Groves was already uncomfortable parking his new Hummer before it was smashed up, tires flattened, and “FOR THE ENVIRON” scratched into the side.  The message from the vandals was clear, this was not a personal vendetta, it was meant to make an example of people damaging the environment by driving large SUVs.  The Hummer being a target because of the status symbol that it does hold as an over the top gas guzzler.

Then the media enters and makes fools out of the people behind this act.  Gareth Groves is presented as a hard working American who is following his dreams of opening a sports marketing company.  Living with his mother to make ends meat (or to take care of her, either way works) Groves was finally able to take major steps in following his dream with the purchase of the Hummer that would be used as a major marketing tool for the company.  Groves’ dreams and livelihood rode in this vehicle and in just five days two men stripped him of these things when they destroyed the Hummer.  Even the neighbors driving hybrids have since lightened up in their hatred of SUVs, because they feel bad for Groves.  

There were probably at least a half a dozen better ways to have handled the situation as Americans will not be scared away from driving Hummers.  The interesting question here is did the Live Earth events (one of which occurred in DC) in anyway inspire this act?  If so, will it inspire other acts of eco-terrorism?