Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC840302); site ogesml0.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!qantel!lll-crg!seismo!mcvax!vmucnam!timpit0!ogesml0!ciaran From: ciaran@ogesml0.UUCP (ciaran) Newsgroups: net.followup Subject: Re: Il accuse... Message-ID: <110@ogesml0.UUCP> Date: Wed, 20-Nov-85 16:04:07 EST Article-I.D.: ogesml0.110 Posted: Wed Nov 20 16:04:07 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 29-Nov-85 08:21:31 EST References: <487@ittvax.ATC.ITT.UUCP> <34@unc.unc.UUCP> <417@stcvax.UUCP> <127@crin.UUCP> <2337@flame.warwick.UURe: Il accuse... Organization: CNET PARIS . PAA/TIM/PIT . PARIS Lines: 46 Relay-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC840302); site ogesml0.UUCP References: <487@ittvax.ATC.ITT.UUCP> <34@unc.unc.UUCP> <417@stcvax.UUCP> <127@crin.UUCP> <2337@flame.warwick.UURe: Il accuse... <108@ogesml0.UUCP> > > As far as entering prohibited areas is concerned, is an act like > >flying over the sakhalin island (Korean airliner incident), on > > ... > I take it from the tone of your article that you think these actions > are appropriate. Congratulations - you may be the only person on the > net who approves of the shooting down of KAL 007. If not, why bring it > up? Custom does not make correctness. > You also have a problem with relevance, or at least applicability. Since > Greenpeace is hardly in the business of espionage, either for themselves > or any national power, your "justification" is too flimsy to stand. > But suppose, just for the sake of argument, they were. What far-fetched > analogy would you use to justify the mining of the ship *in the harbor ... 1. I am concerned by content, not with tone. Several people, of different nationalities, said that violating frontiers is a "non-violent act". This is rubbish -- just wait till someone violates yours and see what your army does. Precedents are legion: WW1, the British trawlers/Iceland incidents, &c. 2. The insinuation that I approve the shooting down of KAL 007 dishonours only its author. Again, content please not "tone", "form", or other nonsense 3. Relevance and applicability. I did not say (because there is no full proof, one way or the other that KAL 007) was a spy ship. In this sense, its case is applicable. As for relevance, it is clear. The discussion was not about the bombing (which everyone agrees on) but about Greenpeace and the methods "non-violent" or "a little violent" and there admissibility to achieve "a good cause." be cleared up) that KAL 007 was a spy ship. Methods in question: storming barricades, crossing the 12 mile limit when a (top secret) nuclear explosion is in progress, flying over military installations on Sakhalin island by accident or by design. 4. In all cases, what interests me primarily is the truth. The truth about KAL 007 has never been clearly established. I regret that and I regret that the truth about the Greenpeace incident has not been established (the truth clearly goes against the French, but also against the New Zealenders who tracked the spy team, BEFORE the explosion, and who hence have a moral guilt). Above all, I regret that the net be used for partisan, subjective and extremist opinions, of whatever nature: pacifist, national chauvinist "My country right or wrong", or (USENET version), "The other country, wrong or doesn't wash as white." Ciaran O'Donnell "que ceux qui prennent leur pieds en lisant 'les news' aillent plutot rue St. Denis."