From: Paul Bradley <paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 22:37:40 +0800
To: Monique Lamont <alice0@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: whine politics again
In-Reply-To: <199705111833.LAA28472@f33.hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.970512210606.266A-100000@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




> on the subject of wine-importing restrictions in florida:
> 
> tcmay wrote:
> > Chiles and his co-conspirators should be shot for high crimes > against the
> > Constitution. After Clinton, Freeh, Kerrey, and the other traitors.
> > 
> > Every day that passes, I'm more convinced that McVeigh did the right > thing.
> > Some innocents died, but, hey, war is hell. Broken eggs and all > that.
> 
> oh yaah.  you betcha.
> 
> it's illegal to ship wine to floridans now, so therefore it is okay 
> to execute the responsible officials and blow up innocents.

The blowing up of innocents is something no-one on this list would agree 
with were it not entirely necessary. Indeed I myself would have great 
problems in justifying the killing of even 1 innocent person by calling 
the fight for liberty "war".

Execution of the responsible officials would be no crime. I applaud the 
sentiments of those who support this viewpoint, and would respect the 
bravery and fortitude of anyone who carried out such an act, provided 
they recognised the necessary step of taking precautions against injuring 
innocent bystanders (tm).

> no doubt there are hundreds of cypherpunks out there nodding
> their heads in blithe agreement at this point.

Of course, but you have twisted this point to imply that Tim meant to say 
the killing of innocents was something to be "brushed aside" as a 
necessary step. Maybe Tim does feel that the loss of a few innocent lives 
in a war situation is justifiable, I have problems with this and have 
said so in previous posts, but I can see the logic behind it, this seems 
to me a very slippery and difficult question to answer, YMMV.

> HELLO PEOPLE!  buy a clue from the Discount Clue Store, and 
> while you are out, stop by the Jiffy Lube and get your
> common human decency refilled.

Common human decency, almost like common sense, the metaphysics of savages.

Your definition of common human decency must be fatally flawed if you 
believe the actions of the criminal bureacrats in the system do not 
justify the executions of these evil officials. It is merely an act of 
self defence to execute people who violate the rights of other people. 

You are the one who seems to need to get the proverbial clue, If you 
merely mean to say that the killing of innocents in the name of "war" is 
not justifiable, then I have a great deal of sympathy and a certain 
amount of agreement with your point of view, if you mean to say that the 
execution of those who violate our rights is not justified as a form of 
self defence or even as a form of punishment for their crimes then you 
could not be further from the truth.

Also, on a slightly more practical point, as I have said, if one was to 
bomb any major commercial or government building the chances of killing a 
truly innocent person are fairly small anyway.