> If I remember the Laws of Land Warfare correctly, to be considered a
> legitimate insurgency and to be afforded the priveledges of a POW, there
> must exist a well defined command structure, there must be at least
> partial control of some territory, soldiers in combat must wear uniforms
> or some other form of identification, and probably several other criteria
> I don't remember. By those criteria, McVeigh is a common criminal who
> deserves to hang.
Argument-from-dictionary holds no water with rational people. The terms "rebel" and "terrorist" are logically equivalent; it is only the emotional baggage they carry that distinguishes them. Such people should not be judged by their clothes, or by their success, or by their choice of organization, but by the justice of their cause and the rationality of their actions.
If McVeigh had broken into the office of the BATF official who led the Waco raid and shot him, or planted a bomb in his desk, I would be first in line to applaud him, regardless of whether he held any territory or wore a uniform. But to indiscriminately kill people who had nothing to do with the raid, and in a way unlikely to have any positive effect on the despotism he allegedly opposed, makes his act a crime rather than legitimate defense.
-- Lee Daniel Crocker <firstname.lastname@example.org> <http://www.piclab.com/lcrocker.html> "All inventions or works of authorship original to me, herein and past, are placed irrevocably in the public domain, and may be used or modified for any purpose, without permission, attribution, or notification."--LDC