Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC840302); site mcvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!mcvax!piet
From: piet@mcvax.UUCP (Piet Beertema)
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: Re: Terrorism Inc.
Message-ID: <861@mcvax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 28-Oct-85 11:32:17 EST
Article-I.D.: mcvax.861
Posted: Mon Oct 28 11:32:17 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 1-Nov-85 00:32:52 EST
References: <487@ittvax.ATC.ITT.UUCP> <34@unc.unc.UUCP> <417@stcvax.UUCP> <127@crin.UUCP>
Reply-To: piet@mcvax.UUCP (Piet Beertema)
Organization: CWI, Amsterdam
Lines: 40


	>>>The sinking of the Greenpeace ship was NOT an act of terrorism.
	>>>It was an act of sabotage.
	>>Why would anyone consider an international organization for peace,
	>>which has never initiated any acts of aggression, to be an "enemy"?
	>>Likewise, how does an unarmed ship, owned by such an organization,
	>>constitute "enemy property"?

	>...war  like the others,  especially when  one party  (Greenpeace in this
	>case) uses wrong facts and induces many people in errors:
	>     -  The island   soil  itself has   *NOT* been  affected  by the nuclear
	>explosions.
Amazing, with all those tests in the athmosphere!

	>     I put in doubt Greenpeace being an organization for peace.
Of course. After all that's what your government tells you...

	>Why then are they  going to war  against countries?
When? Where?

	>In my  opinion, you can only bring to the world the peace you have yourself,
	>in your own life.
Yes, and that's exactly what Mitterand, Hernu etc. did and are still doing; but I
do see some difference between mining a ship and peace.

	>     This  being  said, it is not at all  my intention to present the French
	>government or  military as those who  are right.
Oh?

	>No, France *AND* Greenpeace are *both* wrong, they  are both warmongers,
Right: the former against, the latter for the environment where other people like
you and me have to live in/with.

	>And in my opinion the Greepeace people are not *innocent*.
No, a photographer indeed is a *very* dangerous and highly noxious person, at least
to some governments; they sure must feel pretty comfortable one was killed....

-- 
	Piet Beertema, CWI, Amsterdam
	(piet@mcvax.UUCP)