[FoRK] 911 - The war on understanding
Luis Villa <
luis at tieguy.org
> on >
Mon Sep 11 19:58:54 PDT 2006
I might suggest that not everyone would agree with your policy,
either, completely aside from Tom's criticisms. I think one can make a
fair case that the policy should be 'no theocracies', or perhaps 'no
theocracies which aren't elected and which lack strong guarantees of
civil rights', or perhaps 'no tolerance of political movements which
believe in violence against innocents as a legitimate means of
political expression', and that abhorrence of violence against
innocents is but one consequence of that larger umbrella policy.
(One might also note that if any of those are the policy, at times
violence against innocents will be an acceptable if unpleasant side
effect of pursuing the top-level goal.)
(One might further note that it is perfectly plausible to support such
policies while still abhorring the incompetence, brutality,
illegality, etc., of the Bush-Cheney execution of similar policies.)
On 9/11/06, Albert S. <albert.scherbinsky at rogers.com> wrote:
> Policies prescribe an intended course of action. An
> understanding of where we are is darn useful in
> getting to where we want to go. When the people in
> power start talking in a way that makes it seem like
> they don't have a clue what the heck is going on, it's
> cause for deep concern.
> --- Tom Higgins <tomhiggins at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > The words we use to describe what is happening
> > affect
> > > peoples understanding of what is happening.
> > Peoples
> > > understanding of what is happening affects the
> > > policies governments have to reach the goal.
> > >
> > Words are nice, actions speak louder.
> FoRK mailing list
More information about the FoRK