Letters to the Editor
-
Problems on two levels
It's shocking that Waters was convicted on the basis of the evidence presented in this article. It's always hard to second-guess juries based on press reports, but this case is obviously absurd (unless the article is witholding some major information). Waters has suffered the fate of many of the Guantanamo prisoners, and the thousands rotting in Iraqi jails -- essentially convicted (in Waters's case, literally) based on nothing more than another person's accusation. That's the kind of thing courts and trials were developed to prevent, not abet.
But the terrorism angle deserves severe criticism as well. It's outrageous to allow the government to apply harsher penalties for crimes simply because they were motivated, in whole or part, by a desire to influence government policy. We may wish to condemn certain methods (such as arson) of registering dissent or protest, but certainly the motive is more admirable than simple greed, or personal vendetta, or any of the motives that drive similar crimes not categorized as terrorism. Which act was worse, the firefighter setting a wildfire in hopes of more overtime, or the ELF torching the university office in an attempt to express and enact their principles? I'm not saying that the ELF's act was right, or that no punishment should be meted out, but if anything the political motivation strikes me as a mitigating factor, not an aggravating one.
We must recall our own nation's history. How can we celebrate the Boston Tea Party and condemn the ELF? Was the dumping of all that tea not terrorism simply because the dumpers ended up winning the war? If we're willing to extend our understanding and even admiration to the Boston vandals of 1773, then we need to adopt a similar position when dealing with others who commit similar acts against property out of a desire to protest government and social policies.