Hi, BOB KLAHN!
I read your message from 06.08.2013 13:05
about Clandestine activity is a holy cow of democracy.
ak>>>> Anyway, Snowden did his best.
LL>>> Snowden swore a national security oath. Snowden violated that
LL>>> oath
BK> ...
AK>> Freedom has never been archived without treason of the
BK> What Snowden did is not treason under US law.
It depends on who interprets the law.
AK>> oppressive regime. Because, when fighters for freedom overthrow a
AK>> legitimate, but oppressive power they commit an act of high
AK>> treason. And naturally, they were often
BK> No oppresive power is legitimate. Legal is not legitimate.
BK> Democracy is the only legitimate form of government. It is the only
BK> form under which the people rule themselves.
But security services and repressive forces must be strongly limited
by constitution. It must not be that a few people or a group of people
would have an unlimited control over such forces, whose essence is
obedience without questions. Actually, a good democratic society must
free itself from such thoughtless people of order. People of order is a
big danger for democracy. People must do everything by their heart
order, not because of fear of punishment for disobedience. I still
remember when in 1993 Eltsin in Russia had given an order to such people
to shell the Russian Parlament from tanks, point blank. He defeated the
parliamentarians, but spilt blood and had known its taste. Literally in
a year he started the far more bloody war in Chechnya, because he
thought that solving problem by brutal force is a good and effective way
to gain his aims.
AK>> happen that in future an underground resistance and democracy can
AK>> be one thing. Such things happened in the past. That's why it is
AK>> an extremely bad idea to create mechanism for rooting out
AK>> underground resistance completely. Just in case any democratic
AK>> society must preserve some "woods" where Robin Hoods could hide
AK>> and fight.
BK> The problem with that is, in the US the underground resistance is
BK> made up of the ones who want to be the dictators. Their primary
BK> driving force is hate and bigotry.
I didn't say that criminals must be allowed to do criminal violence.
I just said that they can be defeated without turning the country into a
place where everyone is under surveillance. As I said, such a thing is a
dander itself, maybe even greater danger for democracy than some terror
attacks.
AK>> Terrorism can be killed only the same way how it was born! The US
AK>> people must understand why Arabs that were so far from terrorism
AK>> until WWII became so close to terrorism after the war. The reason
AK>> is simple -- great injustice. So, the remedy against Arab
AK>> terrorism is justice, not spying on all the people around the
AK>> world.
BK> Pope John Paul II said, "If you want peace, work for justice." That
BK> is my motto on that subject.
I like his words, although not many think of them when they act. For
instance, after WWII justice for Jews was achieved at the expense of
Palestinian people, who is a part of a big Arab nation. Millions of
Arabs who lived in Palestine were even not consulted when some people in
Europe decided their future. No peace and prosperity are built this way.
After declaring a two state solution the UN washed its hands and
actually provoked the war by own inaction. Although, then there were
strong forses that kept the UN from intervention and separation Arab and
Jews. When the Korean war happened the UN acted quite differently.
LL>>> Allowing terrorists and bad guys to run and hide is not an
LL>>> option. As George W. Bush said, we have a War on Terror to fight!
LL>>> You heard that? We must make war on a verb! En garde!
AK>> Ha-ha. And he waged war against poor Afghanistan,
BK> Afghanistan was responsible for giving Bin Laden a base. For that
BK> the invasion was justified.
In the East there is no more shame than to betray their guest. Only a
poor politician could imagine that the Taliban would catch Bin Laden so
to give him out to the US, the main ally of Israel, a far more big
criminal (as all the countries in the Middle East think).
Besides, it was an unrealistic task to catch a small group of people
in the immense mountains of Afghanistan. The Taliban could not catch Bin
Laden even if they wished to do it, as Karzay.
AK>> although Bin Laden was in his cozy sweet home in Pakistan.
BK> Bin Laden was not in Pakistan until after the invasion.
But it was easy to guess that he could leave Afghanistan at any time.
So there was no need for bloody invasion and aggravating the civil war
in Afghanistan.
AK>> And Bush declared that the Taliban are terrorists although they
AK>> had never done any terror acts at that
BK> I don't recall Bush declaring the Taliban as terrorists. They were
BK> terrorists to their own people, but the justification for the
BK> invasion was bringing down Bin Laden. Overthrowing the Taliban was
BK> gravy. Unfortunately Bush, and especially Cheney, screwed that up
BK> badly.
I don't think that they terrorized their own people before the the
American led invasion. In the Afghanistan of that time there was a usual
civil war between north and south -- so every side tried to cause as
mush harm to its enemy as it could. Terrorism is not a correct word. At
present time this word became misused very much. And in many places it
helps freedom oppression.
Bye, BOB!
Alexander Koryagin
fido7.debate 2013
--- FIDOGATE 5.1.7ds
* Origin: Pushkin's BBS (2:5020/2140.2)
|
