• Front page
• Receive letters on your RSS reader

I noticed that the top line on the cover of the May 8 Rocky Mountain News proclaims in bold print: “ ... How eco-terrorists pulled off Vail attack ... ”
I have one question: Why are they not eco-insurgents? The Rocky refuses to use the term terrorists when speaking of people who actually are terrorizing the world, yet it doesn’t hesitate to use the term while referring to a couple of “radical environmental activists” who torched a few buildings in Vail.
I don’t know who the Rocky thinks it is fooling, who it is trying to protect or who it is trying not to offend by not calling terrorists what they are; but all terrorists are terrorists and you have to call a spade a spade.

Jennifer Golden, Golden

READER COMMENTS

Well, when the military starts patroling vail, then they will be eco-insurgents.

They are vandals (targeting property) and not terrorists (targeting people). The fact that someone could have accidentally gotten hurt or killed responding to the fire still doesn't make them terrorists. With terrorists people are the explicit target. It's safe to say that no non-hysterical person felt terrified or afraid from the Vail arson.

Doublespeak can be confusing, Jennifer. That's the whole point.
Actually, I can believe that Osama-Bin-Laden is hanging out in a posh resort somewhere in the world. Perhaps even Vail.
He and his family (Bush business partners)
have been MIA since 9/11, despite the 25 million $ bounty on his head.
Let's face reality. Bush doesn't want Osama captured, he just may tell the truth . That would foul up the whole deal. (Business deal, that is).

dmz-BIOYA

"They are vandals (targeting property) and not terrorists (targeting people). The fact that someone could have accidentally gotten hurt or killed responding to the fire still doesn't make them terrorists."

What kind of nonsense is that! They burned down a town.

Burned down a town? That's beyond your usual level of idiocy, high as that is. Lay off the cheap wine, buffoon. The only reason the word terrorism is attached to these actions is to intimidate any who stand in the way of greed and corruption that makes the rich richer.

Hell yes they're terrorists! They firebombed no less than five different locations on the West--including logging camps in Oegon that had people in them. Not only are they terrorists, but they're idiots too! They fire bombed the Two Elks Lodge after it was framed. Why did they do it? To protest the cutting down of the forrests. What did Vail do? Cut down more forrests to re-build the damn lodge. Oh yeah, they're right up their with the crazy f----s who kill abortion docs to save unborn lives. Real bright! Let 'em rot.

Hell yes they're terrorists! They fire-bombed no less than five locations in the west, including a logging camp in Oregon that still had people in it. Not only are they terrorists, but they're idiots too! They burned down the Two Elks Lodge after it was framed. Why did they do it? To protest the destruction of forests. What did Vail do? They cut down more forests to re-build the lodge. Those dumb-asses actually caused more timber to be felled. Yeah, they're right up there with the crazy religious terrorists who kill abortion docs to save unborn lives. Real bright. Let 'em rot.

10:18 annonymous coward,
BIOYOWA...................You're a real class act, typical of cowardly Cons.
so there!
Colorado ski resorts have been built on PUBLIC land, but the profits have gone to PRIVATE Corps. with few exceptions.
GO ELF!!! You're doing God's work and will be rewarded.

Vandalism on a large scale is NOT terrorism. This explicitly made efforts that no one would get hurt. They were major league vandals, nothing more. Yes they are dumb, yes they are contemptible, yes they are felons, but they are NOT terrorists.

Liam-

Even if they,as you say," explicitly made efforts that no one would get hurt. "'

How would they know for sure?

I really don't care what you call it but these destructive A-holes cause MILLIONS of dollars in damage and are but one division of far left moonbat fanatics reeking havoc in the name of "progressive thought" .

As always,the MSN downplays the story.

Read todays RMN story spinning the,poor,manipulated and misunderstood "real victim" in this whole affair- yes the perpetrator of the crime.

Business as usual for the MSM.

Get Real - they wouldn't know for sure and if a firefighter or anyone else died as a result, they would be rightly charged with murder, per the statute. If they were really terrorists, as some here seem to think, then they could have been charged with assault or attempted murder - some person-related crime. No such charges were possible because they meticulously attacked property ONLY. I wasn't aware that they were making a statement about "progressive thought" - I thought they were motivated to protect lynx habitat.

As for the MSM spin, that's another subject.

The United States has defined terrorism under the Federal Criminal Code. Chapter 113B of Part I of Title 18 of the United States Code defines terrorism and lists the crimes associated with terrorism. In Section 2331 of Chapter 113b, terrorism is defined as:

"..activities that involve violent... (or life-threatening acts)... that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State and... appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and ...(if domestic)...(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States...(if international)...(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States..."

Whether or not they targeted people or whether or not anyone was actually hurt is irrelevant. Based on that definition, they sound like terrorists to me.

The FBI defines terrorism as... "the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives."

Again, they sound like terrorists to me.

Liam-

My point was who cares what we call them, their acts are unjustifiable,linx or not, and they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent,which ,in my opinion, they have not.

I own and operate my own business and if some environmental puke fire- bombed it I would not care how others labeled it.

I sure as hell would want them prosecuted ,taking into the fact they COULD'NT know if anyone was inside the mammoth structures they torched,and who might be killed.

I would personally want justice in the form of restitution and a realistic jail sentence based on the crime committed.

I've enjoyed your posts and agree with you often.

My apologies if I'm reading you wrong on this topic.

Kickin back , Memorial Weekend cheers to you-

Will-

Rock on-

Memorial Weekend cheers to you also-

Just returned form a visit w/ my Dad at Fort Logan.
Memorial Day wishes to all.
Especially The Greatest Generation, who played their part and paid dearly for our freedom.

Arson is far far more than simple vandlism. Once the first spark ignites,can anyone really predict how far the flames will spread? Vail could very easly become like Dresden

Arson is far far more than simple vandlism. Once the first spark ignites,can anyone really predict how far the flames will spread? Vail could very easly become like Dresden

POST A COMMENT

• 'Kid Nation' reality show a new low
• Rivers a shameful hire
• Too little news
• ‘Diesel’ fumes
• Unlocalized story a disservice to readers
• Riled up by Christian music
• Darling of the left
• Solutions too costly