From: galt%peruvian.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Greg Alt)
Subject: Re: AF/ATS: Revolutionary Cells communique
Date: 22 Jul 92 14:22:50 MDT
Followup-To: alt.activism,alt.society.revolution
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept
Distribution: world 

In article <1992Jul21.193007.16021@midway.uchicago.edu> duve@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>Are the other 60's revolutionary movements still active?  I'm thinking
>primarily of the Red Brigades in Italy or the Japanese Red Army or related
>groups in the Industrialized countries.            

I have in front of me a U.S. government booklet called "Terrorist Group 
Profiles."  It was printed in 1988, but I bet they have newer versions.
You could probably get your congressman to get you a copy somehow.
According to it, the Red Brigades and the Red Army are still around and 
carried out attacks in '87 and '88.

What amazed me was that the chronology of the Red Army Faction posted here
and the chronology in the government book were almost identical.  Of course,
they both used biased wording to further their agendas, but the facts were
the same.  Also, the U.S. government book wanted to portray terrorists as
targetting innocent civillians, so instead of saying something about RAF
killing the man in charge of an SDI or weapons reasearch firm, they say
"businessman".

Another thing interesting about the book is that George Bush wrote an intro
to it saying: 
  
"... The difference between terrorists and freedom fighters is often clouded.
The philosophical differences are stark and fundamental.  It should be clear
to all that terrorists are criminals who attack our cherished institutions
and profane our values.
  In seeking to destroy freedom and democracy, terrorists deliberately target
noncombatants for their own cynical purposes.  They kill and maim defenseless
men, women, and children.  They murder judges, newspaper reporters, elected 
officials, government administrators, labor leaders, policemen, priests, and
others who defend the values of a civilized society.  Freedom fighters, in
contrast, seek to adhere to international law and civilized standards of
conduct.  They attack military targets, not defenseless civillians.  
Noncombatants casualties in this context are an aberration or attributable to
the fortunes of war.  They are not the result of deliberate policy designed
to terrorize the opposition. ..."

The odd thing about the book is that it is almost entirely about Arab and
Marxist groups.  Now, I know that neo-Nazi terrorist groups exist in the U.S.
and in Europe, but these are not mentioned at all in this book.  Also, some
of the groups have only carried out attacks on military targets, yet they
are still classified as "terrorists".
 
>Propaganda by deed may have its place, but it seems rather parodied by
>working primarily to fix the mistakes of previous acts.                

According to the chronology in the U.S. govt. book, the RAF hasn't made any
attacks with the purpose of releasing prisoners since the 1970's.
Most of their attacks are against military (especially NATO) targets, but
they also have attacked some businessmen who do work for the military, as well
as government officials connected to the military or NATO.

-
sig?
-
Newsgroups: alt.activism