Terrorism cannot be justified

  Terrorism: The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

And that was the intention of the individuals charged by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. I do not know if they committed the crimes for which they are being charged, but if they are proven guilty in a court of law, they deserve to be punished. I may be an environmentalist, but I do not condone this kind of behavior. I am disappointed that HCN apparently does, based on the tone of your blurb in "The Latest Bounce" (HCN, 2/6/06: The Latest Bounce). If it turns out that the members of the Earth and Animal Liberation Fronts are responsible for committing these crimes, as an environmentalist, they have done me a disservice. The ends do not justify the means, no matter what your cause.

Rachel Webb
Wooster, Ohio

Apr 07, 2006 02:28 PM

Ms. Webb offers us a definition of terrorism but does not reveal where she got the definition. After looking at several dictionaries it appears that Ms. Webb made up the definition - or possibly she got it from the Bush Administration.

Neither the American Heritage College Dictionary nor Wenster's New Unabridged Dictionary refer to "property" in their definitions of terror/terrorist/terrorism. In fact, the concept that destruction of property - as opposed to violence directed toward people - constitutes terrorism is an idea that the anti-environmental right has created out of whole cloth.

The essence of the true definition of terrorism is the instilling of fear. Burning humvies on a car lot or trophy mansions in a desserted development under construction likely inspire anger and frustration but not fear!  

The corporadoes and their shills who call themselves "elected officials" have seized on this extension of the classical and true meaning of terrorism for their own ends - silencing dissent, controlling reporters, defending the practice of usury, etc.

Americans - and those who value the environment - should recognize this smearing for what it is. Rejecting destruction of property as a tactic is justified; labelling this tactic terrorism is at best misguided, at worst dangerous to preserving freedom and the natural world.