[Wolves] I'm back!

Jono Bacon wolves at mailman.lug.org.uk
Mon Aug 11 12:58:00 2003

Ow do Dan,

> You're condemning some people who have had the guts
> to stand up to the 
> system in order to try and stop genocide from taking
> place.  I didn't 
> mean you were directly condoning genocide, I meant
> it was implicit.

Implicity can go to every level, and levels you would
not agree with. If you say that I condone genocide
because I dont support breaking the law in relation to
it, then you could say that we all support genocide,
racism, rape, peadophilia and other scurges of the
world because we are not actively fighting it. I don't
feel this is implicit - it is no way connected - just
because I don't agree with that route to fight
genocide does not mean that I do not agree to the
fight of genocide.

> Have you ever heard of self-defence?  Well, I think
> this instance should 
> fall under that category.  The fact that the people
> being defended are 
> thousands of miles away shouldn't come into it.

As stated previously I agree with breaking the law to
an extent in terms of self defence and again this is a
cloudy area. Remember though this is not SELF defence,
this is the defence of the rights of other people. Do
you feel it is right to make decisions for these other
people or do you feel this is dicatorial? As in the
case with the war in Iraq, many viewed the
"liberation" as a good thing and many did not - it is
not clear cut - although it makes sense to help people
because they seem oppressed, sometimes the actual
people have different views on it. I don't know what
to think on this to be honest - there are so many
different ways of looking at it and every way is
hypocrytical - they all conflict in some way.

> What if Linux were being sold by, say, Red Hat, with
> pre-configured 
> k1dd13 h4x0r t00lz to a known DDoS hacker who had
> this charming fixation 
> with targetting hospitals to try to hurt and kill
> people, and you knew 
> where this 'Red Hat Hurt & Kill Linux v9.0' was
> being stored?

This is not my point - I am saying, if there were some
people who just did not like Linux in its current
form, do you support the breaking of crime towards us?
Where does the line draw in terms of race? Do the BNP
have a right to break the law just because they have a
view of how htis country should be run? If someone
does not like the colour of my front door should it be
destroyed by people - is that acceptable?  Although
many of these are answers, many are not and the
intention of the law is to create a generic structure
for order - it is not perfect - I know that, but
neither are people - if you condone breaking the law
for one thing and not another, anarchy will break

In any case, we are not living in a free society - we
have to be democratic over here and we have no option
to not be - if we don't like our government we have to
be governed by them, a factor that we have to live

Nothing is perfect (apart from me *snigger*), and
although it is great to discuss things like this, be
prepared for everyone to be right and wrong as there
is no clear definition of The Right Thing (TM).

Right, I need a cheese toastie. :)


Jono Bacon - http://www.jonobacon.org/
Web Developer - Musician - Writer - Freelancer

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software