1997-06-04 - Re: McVeigh

Header Data

From: Ray Arachelian <sunder@brainlink.com>
To: Paul Bradley <paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
Message Hash: 3ce48e731b42cad54920e8ea70c4128f513a8a43affec662834579d5037363ca
Message ID: <Pine.SUN.3.96.970604161638.24801B-100000@beast.brainlink.com>
Reply To: <Pine.LNX.3.91.970603182957.90A-100000@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
UTC Datetime: 1997-06-04 20:49:42 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 04:49:42 +0800

Raw message

From: Ray Arachelian <sunder@brainlink.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 04:49:42 +0800
To: Paul Bradley <paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: McVeigh
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.91.970603182957.90A-100000@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.96.970604161638.24801B-100000@beast.brainlink.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

On Tue, 3 Jun 1997, Paul Bradley wrote:

> Tim McVeigh certainly acted for the right reasons. This does not make him 
> any less guilty, he killed innocent children in that building (no, I`m 
> not subscribing to the "save the children!" mentality, and do not believe 
> that an innocent childs life is more valuable than that of an innocent 
> adult, merely noting that as children they could not have been guilty of 
> acts of agression against McVeigh or anyone else because they were under 
> the age of criminal responsibility), if we were to say he were any less 
> guilty we would be allowing ourselves to believe in thoughcrime, and not 
> judging the overt act. 

There are those who would say that since the day care center catered to
employees of the building, etc. McVeigh didn't make a mistake there, as
reprehensible as that part of it was.

A better question, and a bigger issue is this: what plausible explanation
was given for the lack of BATF agents in the building on that day?  Could
it be that they knew about the attack?  If they did, why did they allow it
to happen, thus killing those kids in the day care center.  If they did,
we know who the true criminals are.  But this is a good question.  Will we
ever know the truth?

IMHO, If McVeigh did what he did, frying or lethal injection is
acceptable, he decided to take an action that would potentially cost him
his life, gambled and lost.  Like all terrorists, the price of killing
many is the price of being killed.  Etc.  It's a fair trade from one point
of view (though my money says he's shitting bricks right now), unfair from
the victim's point of view.

On one had we have the "faceless" evil governmet that McVeigh and Co. are
against.  On the other we have the day care center and media fodder, etc.
Somewhere in between lies reality.

What happens in the future and what results come out of this are yet
unknown.  Many threads of action by Uncle Sam are possible, unfortunaly,
he's likely to have forced the "faceless" evil ones to be yet even more
fascist and restrictive, which in turn would fuel the next set of
terrorist activities, and the impending revolution the militia is seeking.
Let's see what happens.

The unfortunate truth is that people will not put up with fascist behavior
for very long.  They may call for it to the point of a military state
citing crime statistics, unsafety and such...  But at one point you'll see
them scream "freedom" and grab the nearest weapon - be it a tree branch or
an A1 Abrams tank. :)  And that is something America once knew - now, it
knows "let's legislate the fuck out of the sheeple.  More laws.  This
should be illegal"  Or advertisements for things like circuses that say
"This much fun should be illegal" illustrate the point.

Life sucks.  Death sucks even more.

.+.^.+.|  Ray Arachelian    | "Boy meets beer.  Boy drinks Beer,     |./|\.
..\|/..|sunder@sundernet.com|        Boy gets another beer!"         |/\|/\
<--*-->| ------------------ |                                        |\/|\/
../|\..| "A toast to Odin,  | For with those which eternal lie, with |.\|/.
.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| strange aeons, even death may die.     |.....
======================== http://www.sundernet.com =========================