Re: Fwd: Re: [OT] Re: Defending yourself
On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 04:54:05PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 05/11/2011 06:40 AM, consul tores wrote:
> >Could you please explain which concept of "terrorists" are you referring to?
> >Real or political?
> Do any terrorists have (in the broad sense of the term) non-political aims.
> "Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure
> the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally
> Samuel Adams, essay in The Public Advertiser, 1749
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org with a
> subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> Archive: 4DCB057D.email@example.com">http://lists.debian.org/4DCB057D.firstname.lastname@example.org
In the end, after decades of observing terrorists as they change from one
cause and culture to another, after meeting two or three known "terrorists,"
and after discussions with terrorist supporters (possibly terrorist not
disclosing) I am left with my original impression from high school days.
That is, terrorists are primarily in the business of being terrorists.
Although they may be too far into rage to see it themselves, politics is the
secondary consideration and/or rational. Although politics may have created
the environment spawning the love of terror.
So that might include some spammers, on the lighter, disruptive rather than
violent, end of the terror spectrum.
"Microsoft is not the answer. Microsoft is the question. NO (or Linux) is the