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