< PREVIOUS ]   [ 2008 Index ]   [ Ed Quillen HOME ]   [ SEARCH ]   [ NEXT >


Terrorism is hard to define

Posted 25 June 2008 on the GOAT blog.
Copyright ©2008 by High Country News. Used by permission. All rights reserved.

Felice Pace is right. The term eco-terrorist is older than the current War On Global Terrorism. It does appear to me, though, that since Sept. 11, 2001, we see more name-calling. One point I wanted to make is that people who work within the system by speaking, writing, lobbying, etc., should not be called terrorists of any kind, disagree with them as we may.

Now, as to what constitutes an act of terrorism, specifically the Vail arsons of 1998. The morning after, I got emails from half a dozen Edward Abbey fans I knew. All pointed out that they were somewhere else at the time, and even had witnesses. One friend, who lives a rather isolated off-the-grid lifestyle, told me a few days later that No, I had nothing to do with it and I have no idea who did it, but if those folks need a place to hole up for a while, my door is open.

In other words, the Vail fires did not inspire fear or terror in this part of the Colorado boondocks. Most of us figured that Vail Resorts was big enough and rich enough to fight its own battles, and that the fires had increased sympathy for the company, and thus its successful expansion, which led to the usual Who benefited most from this? at bar-room discussions.

There was, however, the message sent a couple of days later to a radio station, allegedly from the Earth Liberation Front, On behalf of the lynx, five buildings and four ski lifts at Vail were reduced to ashes on the night of Sunday, October 18th. Vail, Inc. is already the largest ski operation in North America and now wants to expand even further. The 12 miles of roads and 885 acres of clearcuts will ruin the last, best lynx habitat in the state. Putting profits ahead of Colorado's wildlife will not be tolerated. This action is just a warning. We will be back if this greedy corporation continues to trespass into wild and unroaded areas. For your safety and convenience, we strongly advise skiers to choose other destinations until Vail cancels its inexcusable plans for expansion.

That message certainly threatens more destruction (we will be back) unless Vail canceled the expansion, as well as threats to people, specifically skiers (For your safety ... choose other destinations.) If this message indeed came from the arsonists, then they were trying to instill fear, even if they did not succeed.

The message also betrayed ignorance of the politics of lynx restoration in Colorado. Vail Resorts contributed $250,000 to the restoration effort that began about a decade ago, which should qualify the company as a friend of the lynx.

However, one boondocks bar-room theory goes like this: Vail got its expansion approved, then supported lynx re-introduction. Now there are lynx spread through the mountains of Colorado. Just about any other ski resort that wants to expand is going to have to address the effects of its expansion on the lynx population. So the lynx are a major roadblock for Vail's competitors. For only $250,000 Vail gets a great deal of protection from possible future competition, plus a positive pro-wildlife image. That company is sure run by some smart people.

I digress here. Back to the arsons. They were set so as not to injure people, but there was no guarantee of that. The camping hunter who holed up in a nearby privy for warmth could have just as easily been in or near one of the fires.

Drawing the distinction between vandalism and terrorism is difficult. But vandalism seldom has a goal, while terrorism does. In other words, if somebody sets your alley trash can on fire, that's likely vandalism. If somebody burns a cross on your lawn, I think we'd both agree that's something else, even though the burning cross is merely violence against property, not against people.

The mean acts Felice faced in Siskiyou County; were they terrorism? The tire-slashing was an act of violence, aimed at making him fearful. Sounds like terrorism to me. The dead owl and the salmon were also designed to frighten him, but they weren't necessarily acts of violence (assuming the owl was roadkill, perhaps, and the salmon caught legally). At any rate, I admire his courage for standing up against this.

Drawing the line between vandalism and terrorism is more complicated than determining whether the attack is against property or against people. Perhaps we would do best to retire the word terrorism and its derivatives, and stick to more precise terms like arson, vandalism, intimidation, murder, etc.


< PREVIOUS ]   [ 2008 Index ]   [ Ed Quillen HOME ]   [ SEARCH ]   [ NEXT >