TruthMonger wrote:

Blanc makes some excellent points about the average citizen being caught in a ping-pong crossfire in the conflict between government and anti-government forces. However, as I said, this is in the nature of conflict and the citizen's best option may be to make a daily effort to resist the government oppression, no matter how small it may seem in any instance. .....................................................

Appreciate all the kudos, TruthMongrel. <g> The problem that I was talking about is that of not being able to distinguish one's enemies from one's friends because they all act alike and therefore being in a position of danger from either of them. In that case, it doesn't matter which philosophy (political, economic, etc.) one should support; the immediate fact of the matter is physical - physical safety from all those Cowboys & Indians trying to get rid of each other regardless of the reasons or the purpose. In that case they are not advancing the kind of philosophical cause which supports superior values and which results in better circumstances. They are not "separating the wheat from the shaf", they are not being descriminating about what should live and what should die, they are not allowing innocent bystanders to make a decision about which side they're on or what risks they are willing to take in the "war" which they may not realize is happening. In that case, the real end of a "terrorist" action is personal and has little to do with a preferable way of life for humans, or grievances against an unjust oppressor. When two "opposed" groups are willing to stick it you without concern, there is no difference between them. Because, what difference does it make? .. Blanc .. Blanc