Letters to the Editor

Readers write about ecoterrorism, trading nuclear technology for oil, nuclear waste, copyright laws, and 'robocalls.'

'Ecoterrorist' is wrong term for those who target things

Regarding the March 5 article, "Ecoterror persists after crackdowns": I disagree with the decision to use the term "ecoterrorist" when referring to people who vandalize projects or the property of those they deem to be destructive to the environment or abusive to animals. While we may not agree with the tactics of this brand of environmentalists, the word "terrorist" ought to be reserved for those who actually use terror as a political tool. Terrorists target the lives of innocent people, they don't target things.

Perhaps in the opinion of environmentalists, the true ecoterrorists are those who wreak destruction on the environment itself, not those who are trying to protect it.

Randal Seech
San Clemente, Calif.

On French nuclear trades

Regarding Matthew Fuhrmann's Feb. 29 Opinion piece, "Nuclear technology for oil – a bad trade": Mr. Fuhrmann failed to mention that in 1974 France also agreed to supply Pakistan with a nuclear reprocessing plant, but later refused to deliver due to American pressure. Pakistan had no oil to supply. Now Pakistan has the nuke, and I pray that it will never be used. The world has seen the suffering of the people of Japan.

Manzoor Hussain
Islamabad, Pakistan

Regarding Matthew Fuhrmann's recent Opinion piece on trading nuclear technology for oil: While Mr. Fuhrmann derides France as an enabler of nuclear programs in Iraq (destroyed by Israel in 1981) and Iran, he neglects to mention that it was France that provided the original technology for Israel's nuclear program. This is a source of regional instability that Iran may in some measure be addressing with its nuclear program. Fuhrmann would do better to advocate a nuclear-free Middle East.

Barry Flanagan
Tucker, Ga.

Stop nuclear waste imports

In response to the Feb. 28 article, "US to be nuclear-waste dump?": Italy is sending 20,000 tons of nuclear waste to the United States? Is this some kind of bad joke? Why would anyone even think of bringing more nuclear waste than we already have, from another country, to dump here? We shouldn't have nuclear waste in the first place. We shouldn't have nuclear power plants.

Jane Hooten
Mukwonago, Wis.

Copyright laws are outmoded

Regarding your Feb. 20 editorial, "'Google generation' myths": The reasons behind having copyright and intellectual property laws are falling into the abyss more every day.

These laws stifle innovation and do not help inventors the way they once did. For the world we live in to progress into the future, these old ideas must be done away with, as they move too slow for our fast-paced world, which gets faster every day.

Copyright regimes are unfair and unjust and they must become just another fragment of history.

Alex Trent
Richmond, Ky.

End automated campaign calls

In response to the Feb. 27 article, "Ringing off the hook: Senate moves to limit 'robocalls' ": I'd be happy to listen and interact with a real person representing a candidate or party, but the endless, annoying autodialed calls definitely need to stop. I am on my state's no-call list, and it has helped tremendously with other unwanted calls.

Why should politicians be allowed to annoy? It is definitely driving me crazy.

Diane Phinney
Farmington, Mo.

The Monitor welcomes your letters and opinion articles.

Because of the volume of mail we receive, we can neither acknowledge nor return unpublished submissions. All submissions are subject to editing. Letters must be signed and include your mailing address and telephone number. Any letter accepted may appear in print or on our website, Mail letters to Readers Write and Opinion pieces to Opinion Page, One Norway St., Boston, MA 02115. E-mail letters to Letters and Opinion pieces to OpEd.

of stories this month > Get unlimited stories
You've read of 5 free stories

Only $1 for your first month.

Get unlimited Monitor journalism.