From: TruthMonger <tm@dev.null>
Date: Sun, 11 May 1997 14:49:15 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: War & InfoWar
Message-ID: <199705110628.AAA04901@wombat.sk.sympatico.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Blanc wrote:
> TruthMonger wrote:
> >  Of course, you have your own definintion of innocenent bystanders,
> >while others may have different definitions.
> ..........................................................
> To me, an innocent bystander would be someone who was walking by a building
> which was blown up by someone with a grudge against its occupants.
> 
> You lose the point of your attack when you kill those who do not relate to
> the reason for your attack.

  Not necessarily. Free thinkers are perfectly capable of judging the
reasons behind those involved on both sides of a conflict, and making
an individual judgement as to the culpability of both parties.
  When a citizen shoots an intruder who is breaking into their house
and threatening their saftey, there will always be family members,
lawyers and anti-gun proponents who will decry the individual's use
of force to defend their home and person/family. There are others,
whoever, who will recognize that the perpetrator is the one who is
ultimately responsible for placing the homeowner in the position of
having a need to defend themself.

  Personally, if I need to worry about my life because my government's
actions makes them an actionable target of an increasing number of the
citizens, then I am going to take action to change the government.
  I do not deny anyone's right to suffer silently, but neither do I
deny an individual's right to strike out at the source of their
oppression.

  If you have developed a method for waging war without ordinary
citizens coming into the line of fire, then I would like to hear 
about it. I don't like conflict any more than the next person, but
I do not see concession to the oppressor as a viable option just
because conflict will cause loss and heartache.
  Take a look at the results of the appeasement policy that Britain
had in regard to Hitler. It resulted in scores of deaths that could
have been prevented had those proposing it taken a firm stand that
supported freedom from tyranny.

  The fact is that Tim McVeigh is facing criminal charges for his
chosen actions, while the murderers at Waco are not.
  Until the average citizens demand the same justice for government
agents as is demanded of anti-government agents, the average John
or Jane Doe can expect to get caught in the crossfire.

TruthMonger