Alienation works both ways, and these Drug Warriors are not likely to respond to our attempts to be "sensitive" or "understanding" or to seek "dialogue". If you tried to hug one he would arrest you for assault. While lack of consciousness might deprive them of /mens rea/ (criminal intent, an element of murder), they have a duty, given their positions, to be reflective and to be conscious, so it is at least criminally negligent homicide, and if we rhetorically assault them with cries of "Murderers!" we might reach a few, and more likely, reach their families, friends, and neighbors. It was not such criticisms of the attackers at Waco that directly brought remorse from some of the BATF and FBI agents involved, but that it reached to their own social circles and resulted in them being shunned and rejected by the people close to them. Of course, that drove them further into the supporting embrace of their colleagues, further isolating them, but at least it led to a few who admitted in private conversation that the burnout of the Davidians was intentional, was intended to kill them all, and was done because the FBI agents were fatigued and the standoff was blowing their budget and not advancing their career prospects. So by all means call them "murderers", but just don't make the mistake they do of not being reflective of what you are doing and the full consequences of it to everyone.
Geof Gibson wrote: >--- In [email protected], Jon Roland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>Without knowing the individuals personally, but knowing people that >>appear to be like them, we can conclude that they did indeed want both >>Peter McWilliams and Steve Kubby dead, because those dissenters, like >>many libertarians, are a challenge to the career, institutions, and >>belief systems into which they have invested their lives. >> >> > >So, if they are doing it unconsciously, is the appropriate response to >condem them as murderers? Does the definition of murder, as opposed >to manslaughter, not require intent, which would have to be conscious? > >Why must we condem those with whom we disagree as evil? That is >exactly what the anti-American Left is doing. It is also EXACTLY what >Islamic extremist terrorist are doing. Does it not make more sense to >educate and inform these unconscious Americans? > >By alienating those with whom we disagree, we condem the Libertarian >party to 2% status. > > > -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- Our efforts depend on donations from people like you. Directions for donors are at http://www.constitution.org/whatucando.htm Constitution Society 7793 Burnet Road #37, Austin, TX 78757 512/374-9585 www.constitution.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------------- [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
