From: "Peter Trei" <trei@process.com>
Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 22:51:23 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Applauding Violence (was: Re: Wine Politics Again! (fwd))
Message-ID: <199705121427.HAA27541@toad.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


> Date:          Sun, 11 May 1997 04:07:36 +0200 (MET DST)
> Subject:       Re: Wine Politics Again! (fwd)
> To:            cypherpunks@toad.com
> From:          nobody@replay.com (Anonymous)
> Organization:  Replay and Company UnLimited
> Reply-to:      nobody@replay.com (Anonymous)


Froomkin wrote:
>> On Fri, 9 May 1997, Tim May wrote:
>>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.

> It ill behooves participants in a democracy to either advocate or even
> tolerate or even cluck sympathetically at mass murder for political ends. 
> This way lies Bosnia.

> A. Michael Froomkin

Agreed. I'm getting progressively more turned off by
Tim's developing survivalist/confrontationist stance. I fear that
journalists and other casual readers will mistake his positions
for common 'cypherpunk' viewpoints. 

The type of armed, ingrained bitterness towards all aspects and
manifestations of government he displays is hazardous to himself
personally; I can envisage a simple traffic stop turning violent.

Worse, he's demonizing his opponent. This is counter-productive.
It's better to try to understand the actual underlying goals of 
your opponent - it gives you a much better chance at turning
him into your ally, or avoiding a conflict if you cannot do that.
If he can be neither turned nor avoided, the minimum action to
change the status quo should be used.

If Tim truly maintains that a 'war' is underway between people
like him and the government, than he would be in no position 
to complain if Clinton's men treated his little hilltop retreat
as an enemy outpost. 

For all his pride in it's defensibility, they could take it out 
in seconds if respect for due process, the Constitution, and a 
real concern for the lives of innocents did not stop them.

The policies of the current gang in power are bad, and may well
get worse. But terrorism is not yet an appropriate response, and
I pray that it never will be.


Peter Trei
trei@Process.com