hallam@dscomsa.desy.de (Phill Hallam-Baker) writes:  >|>>the murderes of four police officers to justice perhaps we could >|>>hear it. >|> >|>They _had_ a sure-fire method: keep them bottled up and talk them to death or >|>surrender without giving him justification for some looney-tune religious >|>stunt. >|> >|>Phil, I've been reading your postings for months and I'm convinced that you >|>will back anything, no matter how damaging it may be to yours or anyone >|>else's rights if you think it will hurt people you don't like.  It's people >|>with that attitude that set up the preconditions for the Holocaust, a process >|>that is in place _now_ in this country, even if the tattered, pitiful remains >|>of the Constitution is slowing its progress.  This isn't a Libertarian issue, >|>others may argue that line, but from a strictly Constitutional view of a >|>democratic gov't, what the FBI and BATF did was wrong, wrong, wrong, even if >|>their _reasons_ for trying to arrest Koresh were 100% right.  _Anything_ that >|>leads to the deaths of 17 children, if nothing else touches your stoney >|>heart, is _wrong_ no matter who pushed the button.  For God's sake, man, get >|>your morality back.  >The person who murdered 17 children was Koresh. He kept them there and  >brought about their deaths deliberately.  >You may consider that I am a complete bastard and a not very nice chap. >Thats quite true. I don't pretend to be. Being nice is what amateurs >try to do. If you want to talk politics you are talking hard decisions >such as whether the lives of the troops should be risked attempting >to rescue the children. Anyone who has held the office of President >of the United States since FDR has held the threat that if the USA >or its allies were to be threatened then the USA would risk nuclear  >Holocaust in order to protect freedom. Beleive it or not, that is not >the sort of threat that nice chaps make. Do they have a gun nutters >section of the US version of CND by any chance?   >There are cases where society has to be protected from >madmen such as Koresh or Hitler. If it were not for the consideration >of the 17 children in there the question of the tactics to be used would >not be a matter of anything but academic significance. It is not for >the govt to prevent people from commiting mass suicide.  >The latest reports are that cult members were shot attempting to >leave the compound by Koresh loyalists during the fire. If proven >that would entail the final nail in the coffin of those who want to >promote Koresh as some sort of role model or hero.  >I need hardly add that it is Koresh that has created the Holocaust in >this case by the deliberate arson of the ranch appocalypse.  Let me see if I got this right.  Group of religious plinter schismatics erect a compound and after at least fifty years of peaceful co-existance with the outside community (having shoot outs only with each other) - this makes them dangerous.  Prior history would seem to indicate they are only dangerous to themselves.  Last I knew there was no National Branch Davidian Party blaming the debacle in VeitNam on Foreign Meddlers and three-two beer, calling for the Rounding up of Meat Packers, Growers and Slaughter Houses.  You want tough political choices - how about letting odd balls be odd balls?  (I know, this requires tolerance for  those that go into Government - but we all know people who have no useful skills.)   ith the death of the children everybody is getting real upset - what about the other 40 plus people? I suppose that you consider children to be property of the state with the family as custodians. (In the States its the other way around - children are parental property.) If what you consider a Corrupt Government demands that you send you children into _their_ tender care - I suppose that you will obey the State and turn you children over to their care.  Sorry - I am not as enamoured of the womb to tomb cradle that is IngSoc.  Gotta go, the beach is calling. chus pyotr