I agree with Bill, AP sounds like a very good club for the Exon types to beat us with. Jim's latest comments sounded no different to me than the mealy mouthed "understanding" messages that Sinn Fein publish about the IRA. Given the opportunity to condem any attack on the President under AP rules we get a non commital non-condemnation. Its the type of thing that Gerry Adams says after his men have just killed two kids with a bomb in a litterbin outside a MacDonalds. Ideology is a powerful political weapon. It simplifies complex political issues and generates momentum allowing political change. Unfortunately it also creates bad government as ideology persued for the sake of ideology. Ideology does not debate, it acts. When Marxism was created in the latter half of the 19th century it had many usefull effects. In particular it definitely assisted the transition from monarchy to democracy by creating a widespread belief that the existing situation was unstable. By the end of the first world war however this energy had largely served whatever purpose it would, at least in Europe if not in other parts of the world. Unfortunately a very large number of people had failed to realise that it was an ideology whose time had come and gone. The industrial and political situation it addressed no longer existed. The major left wing movements by that time were socialism and liberalism, both of which rejected the Marxist extreeme. As the Marxist idealogues got frustrated by their evident lack of progress they turned to terrorism. The Bader Minehof gang believed that they could spark the revolution by jolting society out of its complacency. Their strategy was remarkably like AP. If the heads of large corporations were likely to be assasinated then noone would want to lead a large firm. In fact as any person with counter terrorism experience will tell you the threat of death is remarkably ineffective as a means of intimidation. It creates the opposite effect, strengthening the resolve of the target. I discussed this point recently with someone close to Mossad who agreed. Terrorism is becomming an increasing concern. The amount of damage an individual can cause is much greater than that possible in the past. There are plenty of exhausted ideologies about which can be fashioned into a justification of murder. Jim's post shows very clearly how Libertarianism can be converted into a justification for terrorism. Its a very short gap between being opposed to government and actively fighting against it. I see libertarianism as the exhausted remnant of the mercantilism of the 1980s. As constructed it recognises only those rights which favour the privileged in society and none of those which benefit the ecconomically disadvantaged. Politically it reached its peak influence almost a decade ago when Regan and Thatcher were at their zenith. The '94 congress will probably be seen as the turning point in the political tide with the mainstream of politics moving back to the left again. There will always be people arround who conclude that the failure was not being close enough to the ideology. If the libertarians are not carefull they will be inexorably linked in the public mind with the terrorists who act in their name. Phill