Re: War & InfoWar

[bennett_t1@popmail.firn.edu]

At 09:15 PM 5/10/97 -0600, you wrote:
>Blanc wrote:
>
>> Lately Tim has been making extremely dramatic death statements:   "Kill
>> them all...they are unworthy of life.", "... I
>> pray for the deaths of these criminals.",  "Washington is a cancer than can
>> only be cured with a few megatons of
>> nuclear disinfectant.", "May they all be vaporized.", etc.
>> 
>> These are definitely dark in mood and understandable; I also have violently
>> negative & despairing emotions about these people.   I just wouldn't ever
>> think of involving those who are innocent bystanders and happened to be in
>> the wrong place at the wrong time.
>
>  Of course, you have your own definintion of innocenent bystanders,
>while others may have different definitions.
>  Is someone who is in the military because of forced enscription at
>the point of a gun (with threats of imprisonment if they refuse) an 
>innocent bystander? When an invading force attacks your home, do you
>only shoot back at those who are there willingly?
>  How about those who willingly process and uphold the atrocities
>which the government commits upon its citizens? (Those who don't turn
>on the gas, but merely put them in the ovens {because the paperwork
>all seemed to be in order}.)
>
>  Were the children in the daycare center at the Federal Building
>at OK city innocent bystanders?
>  Then why, pray tell, did the government allow them to be placed
>in a building which was known to be a prime target of anti-government
>paramilitary idealists? Were they being used as a "shield" in the
>hopes that their presence would protect the others? Or were they
>there in order to provide sensational fodder for government response
>to the inevitable?
>  History bulges with examples of governments using their citizens
>as human shields by placing armament factories in residential areas
>and there are a multitude of other examples of government disregard
>for the lives of their citizens.
>  The government has prosecuted dozens of individuals for planning
>to bomb the OK city Federal Building (including executed murderers).
>It has long been listed as a target of choice for anti-government
>paramilitarists. For the government to deny culpability in children
>being present at the bombing reeks of hypocrisy.
>
>> I know that critical times call for critical action, but I just don't
>> expect from anarchist libertarian cypherpunks that they would "throw
>> caution to the wind" (so to speak) and forget how to think about events and
>> actions in terms of specifics and utter precision.
>
>  The fact of the matter is that the government has declared war
>on the freedom and liberty of its citizens and passed draconian
>laws which prevent citizens from defending themselves from 
>government oppression. The government protects those participating
>in its crimes from having to pay a price for their complicity.
>  The government has a ruinous effect on the lives of millions
>of its citizens daily and is responsible for a mountain of deaths
>of "innocent people." Those taking part in the process should be
>made aware that there is a price to pay for their actions.
>
>  Should the Allied war against Nazi Germany have not taken place
>because "innocent" lives would be lost? Should the French Freedom
>fighters not have fought to free their country from occupation
>because "innocent bystanders" would die in the process?
>  Timothy McVeigh's position in history will likely belong in the
>hands of the winner of the war between the government and its
>citizens, but he is already considered a freedom fighter by more
>people than the government would like to admit. He has issued a
>wake-up call for those who think that they can remain nameless 
>and faceless in their complicity with government atrocities.
>
>  While I would have chosen a different approach and target for
>an attack, I will not pass moral judgement on McVeigh's actions.
>That is between himself and his conscience.
>  Tim McVeigh at least had the fortitude to act on his outrage
>over what he perceived as government injustice. What did others
>do over the outrageous tragedy at Waco? Mostly they just turned
>their heads away and tried to pretend that our government is not
>a murderer of men, women and children.
>  How many government employees quit in outrage, stating that
>they would not take part in such atrocities? How many took a
>vocal moral stand against their superiors, or exposed the
>government duplicity involved in the police action?
>
>  Nobody who turns their head is "innocent" and they cannot avoid
>their own responsibility if they choose to place their children
>in the line of fire as a result of their participation in crimes
>against the citizens.
>  Given the wide knowledge of the OK city Federal Building being
>a known target of anti-government forces, I think the placing of
>a daycare center there was the equivalent of military forces who
>cowardly advance with women and children in front of them. (And
>there are ample examples of this in history.)
>
>  Those in government express outrage at the barbarity of an
>individual citizen attacking his oppressors, but apparently are
>not outraged enough to stop their oppression.
>  The fact is that we have a police state whose power and abuse
>of power are growing by leaps and bounds because there has been
>no realistic amount of accountability attached to their actions.
>  This is an unnatural state of affairs and one that human nature
>will correct. When things become too far out of balance, then
>the universal laws of nature correct the situation. I believe that
>the dinosaurs learned this lesson, as well.
>
>TruthMonger
>
>
Citizens used to not take any of the government's crap.  After the
revolutionary war, if the governemt so much as wiped their asses sideways
without the citizens approval, people would let them know, vehemently.
Citizens need to do this more often.