On Tue, 12 Sep 2000 anonymous@openpgp.net wrote:
Michael Motyka wrote:
safer, cleaner place but calling McVeigh a "freedom fighter" is off the mark. 0 points for that one.
Why?
Interesting question, actually... The difference between a "random crazy" and a "freedom fighter" can be awfully dang thin. I think that in order to qualify as a "freedom fighter" there has to be a significant faction who support your actions and a nonzero chance of bringing about real change. Mcveigh, as he is, is just a random crazy. But if, say, one out of ten American Citizens or so had looked up from the news story and gone, "It's about time somebody started fighting those bastards" then he'd have a constituency to whom he could be a freedom fighter. And also a nonzero chance of causing real change. Not a bit of difference in his own actions -- but the context in which his actions took place -- and his decision to make exactly those actions in that context -- make him a random nut rather than a freedom fighter. It's just my opinion. But that's how I see it. Freedom fighters do what they do because they have constituency whose interests they are fighting for and a realistic belief that the fight will change something. I think these were lacking in Mcveigh's case. Bear