http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,178230,00.html

The FBI estimates that ecoterrorist groups have committed more than 1,100
crimes in the United States since 1976, causing about $110 million in
property damage, and the building industry group says $8 million of that
damage has been in Washington state since 1996.

Thanks for the story. I do not support the types of actions we read
about in the article, which are needlessly destructive and have
potential to harm living things. While I sympathize with their
motives, their actions are wrong and, frankly, do not serve their
causes well.

I will also say that simple property destruction does not automatically
"terror" make. Expensive and needless vandalism, perhaps - but
application of the "terror" moniker for many things - like knocking
over a transmission tower - is hyperbole. Starting fires or bombing is
borderline, however, and certainly unwarranted.

Bruce Jensen

bpnjensen wrote:
I will also say that simple property destruction does not automatically
"terror" make. Expensive and needless vandalism, perhaps - but
application of the "terror" moniker for many things - like knocking
over a transmission tower - is hyperbole.

"Do what I say or I'll destroy your stuff when you're not looking."
Sounds like terrorism to me.

--
If John McCain gets the 2008 Republican Presidential nomination,
my vote for President will be a write-in for Jiang Zemin.

BpnJ,

Sit in the Front Room of your House with your Family and have
a Molotov Cocktail {Fire Bomb} thrown through the Window [.]
Now Tell Me That Is NOT Terror !
- - - Yes I Know Ecology and Saving the Planet Helps to
Justify A Lot of Eco-Terrorist Crimes against Property by
the Liberal Media.

However, just be a Black Family in the South and have a
Burning Cross placed on your Front Yard by the KKK and
it is Instant National News of "White Racist Terror" by the
Liberal Media.

Any Crime Against a Person (Corporation) or Their Property that
is designed to Kill, Injure, Damage, Destroy, or Create Fear
is a Terrorist Act [.] - IMHO

Also - IMHO - Terrorist Deserve (need to be placed) Life in Prison
without possibility of Parole : In Maximum Security with Solitary
Confinement for Life as an Example to All : That All Terrorism
Will NOT Be Accepted Under Any Circumstances [.] [.] [.]


so say i - my opinions stated as facts ~ RHF

BpnJ,

Sit in the Front Room of your House with your Family and have
a Molotov Cocktail {Fire Bomb} thrown through the Window [.]
Now Tell Me That Is NOT Terror !

Please read what I said.

I would never advocate this. I would call this terror.

Bombing of unoccupied areas is borderline.

Bruce

"Do what I say or I'll destroy your stuff when you're not looking."
Sounds like terrorism to me.

Call it what you want. Your definition and mine will just have to
vary.

Bruce Jensen

In article .com,
"bpnjensen" wrote:

Thanks for the story. I do not support the types of actions we read
about in the article, which are needlessly destructive and have
potential to harm living things. While I sympathize with their
motives, their actions are wrong and, frankly, do not serve their
causes well.

I will also say that simple property destruction does not automatically
"terror" make. Expensive and needless vandalism, perhaps - but
application of the "terror" moniker for many things - like knocking
over a transmission tower - is hyperbole. Starting fires or bombing is
borderline, however, and certainly unwarranted.

Sometimes what starts out as "simple property destruction" ends up
injuring or killing people.

Knock over a transmission tower and you end up with live wires on the
ground that can kill people.

A vacant building may have someone like a homeless transient in it for
example. Starting a fire could kill someone in the "empty" building. A
fireman showing up to fight the fire could get killed. The fire company
showing up to fight the deliberately set fire would not be able to
attend to another accidental fire that threatens people.

A rule of life is that if you initiate an action of violence it is then
out of your control and sometimes takes on a life of its own.

Destroying peoples property has consequences intended and otherwise the
least of which is physiological and that my friend is terror.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

dxAce said it right,Shoot The *******s.
www.jacksoncrime.org
cuhulin

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article .com,
"bpnjensen" wrote:

Thanks for the story. I do not support the types of actions we read
about in the article, which are needlessly destructive and have
potential to harm living things. While I sympathize with their
motives, their actions are wrong and, frankly, do not serve their
causes well.

I will also say that simple property destruction does not automatically
"terror" make. Expensive and needless vandalism, perhaps - but
application of the "terror" moniker for many things - like knocking
over a transmission tower - is hyperbole. Starting fires or bombing is
borderline, however, and certainly unwarranted.

Sometimes what starts out as "simple property destruction" ends up
injuring or killing people.

Knock over a transmission tower and you end up with live wires on the
ground that can kill people.

A vacant building may have someone like a homeless transient in it for
example. Starting a fire could kill someone in the "empty" building. A
fireman showing up to fight the fire could get killed. The fire company
showing up to fight the deliberately set fire would not be able to
attend to another accidental fire that threatens people.

A rule of life is that if you initiate an action of violence it is then
out of your control and sometimes takes on a life of its own.

Destroying peoples property has consequences intended and otherwise the
least of which is physiological and that my friend is terror.

We have laws on the books for people that start fires. They're call
arsonists, and the crime is called arson.

We have laws on the books for people that kill people. They're called
murderers, and the crime is called murder.

Murder when combined with the commission of another felony, such as arson,
can be charged as first degree murder, a capital crime, in most states.

One could stretch and call any arson or any murder a terrorist act.. but I
don't believe that to be logical, lest we call every crime a terrorist act.
I also disagree with calling any crime a hate crime. It's a crime, there are
laws on the books to cover it. Period. To call it a hate crime or a
terrorist crime gives more credit to the perpetrator and less to the victim
in every case. To call something a hate crime is to marginalize the victim
as someone worthy of someone's hate.. but I digress.

bush is a TERRORIST,he hates our U.S.Constitution.bush is a
TERRORIST,plain and simple.
cuhulin