Letters to the Editor
-
If she's not a terrorist, who is?
If the justice system failed Briana Waters and she really WAS nowhere near the campus on the night of the arson, then there's a problem with the trial judge, the jury, or Waters' attorneys. But if she WAS standing lookout that night, then she participated in the destruction of property with the intention of intimidation to achieve an ideological objective. That's literally textbook terrorism. So she's a violin teacher. So what? So she's a white mother and homemaker. So what? She helped burn down a building in order to terrorize a company into changing its practices. She belongs in jail. The tone of your headline suggests the Feds misused anti-terrorism laws to jail someone innocent of terroristic activity. But the man-bites-dog facet of this story is that an accused terrorist wants to be exempted from anti-terrorism laws because her cause is noble. Every terrorist thinks his cause is noble. The Feds didn't "exploit" the law (actually, they did — exploit doesn't mean what many people think it means); they "applied" the law.