[at-l] AT on FOXnews

[RoksnRoots@aol.com (RoksnRoots@aol.com)]

In a message dated 8/29/01 3:53:21 PM Eastern Daylight Time, 
mfuller@somtel.com writes:

<<    We don't know that anyone
 > from the government was harassing anyone, regardless of the phone
 > calls. Given the types of criticisms offered here of the ATC and the
 > government, I'd find it amusing and ironic if they were organized
 > enough to be harassing of anyone. >>

    

   I wonder,"mfuller", if you think the government should have interceded 
with the condo clusters visible from and abutting the Trail in the NE? Or was 
this simply a case of culmination of land rights justice? Sorry if this is 
too direct, but I feel it needs to be asked. You appear to me to be a person 
who defends Trail developers over the Trail.

   Sometimes when people innocently (or otherwise) blunder in on top of the 
Trail's wild future they need to be "harassed". Protection of nature is no 
offense in the face of unlimited sprawl. Where do you draw the middle ground? 
Or do you just point to a comfortable politic and live with the results? I 
can't believe you are taking caution with people whose only intention is to 
develop until stopped. Believe me, they don't return to the Appalachian Trail 
project the level of concern you do towards their "rights". (Look how 
Saddleback returned that "concern") 

   (These are rhetorical debate challenges. Please don't start that pc "tone" 
nonsense. If anyone doesn't feel a need to answer or appreciate hard Trail 
advocacy, fine. These questions will still exist from their own validity) 
While some were deciding whether or not they felt this was delivered 
correctly, or by a credible person, or was valid, or had the right "tone", it 
was happening anyway. Each exercising their God granted personal rights, 
while the forest was burning. 

    I feel these questions, and what inspired them, are central to the AT's 
theme and should always be a perpetual part of its dialogue. Even if I were 
the only one crazy enough to say so.