Robert J. Bradbury (firstname.lastname@example.org) Sat, 11 Sep 1999 10:00:45 -0700 (PDT)
asks a rhetorical question, and then answers it himself (which is what makes it rhetorical), suggesting a paucity other possible answers:
>What possible *motive* would there be for the Govt to want to
intentionally murder a bunch of
>its own citizens? It makes no sense.
First, let me note that Robert uses "the Govt" here in exactly the "global" sense for which he in a prior post, criticized Ian. In so doing he demonstrates how we all run the risk when using a broad plural noun or pronoun--"we", "libertarians", "americans", "women", "baptists", "lawyers", "serbians", etc.-- of casting the net too wide. When the net so cast is critical--as is often the case--the innocent so ensnared, usually the vast majority, protest fiercely, while the guilty use the opportunity to lose themselves in the noise and crowd. When you accuse, aim carefully. Innocent bystanders make great cover.
Returning to the question: "What possible motives would there be for the" specific government agents involved "to want to intentionally murder a bunch of their own citizens?"
Let's look at the phrase, "a bunch of their own citizens."
My neighbors, my friends, my fellow extropians,... even some members of my family--these are "a bunch of *my* own citizens".
Fifty-two American hostages from the embassy in Tehran, the crew of the Mayaguez, American medical students in Grenada, three soldiers who stray across the Macedonia/Kosovo border--these are "a bunch of their own citizens".
A heavily armed cult of religios wackos--lead by a charismatic, long-haired, religious-fundamentalist, sexual pervert and child abuser--who are resisting arrest, holed up in their "compound", defying the legitimate lawful authority, who have murdered four police officers...
These are not "a bunch of their own citizens." These are a bunch of "perps."
I suggest that it is a matter of record that this is the way the Branch Davidians had been presented/demonized. I suggest that it is a matter of record that no media representative was allowed close enough to them to permit their side of the story to be shown to the public (thereby humanizing them). And I suggest that you judge for yourself whether this was an accident.
After fifty-one days of media-celebrated frustration by the muckamucks in positions of responsability; after fifty-one long, exhausting, boring, humiliating days of frustration, and separation from their families by the frontline troops--knowing all the while that those who were the source of their frustration had killed four of their own; after all that, Robert, you ask the question "what possible motive...?" I hold you second only to Anders in quality of stuff--and you're gaining on him fast--but really Robert, you must have a blind spot of this one.
From the day the BATF guys hauled their dead away from the Mt. Carmel campus, every guy in the US with a badge dreamed of standing over Koresh's bullet-riddled body. Their fifty-one days of media-celebrated frustration, and the FALSE rumors of child-abuse intensified this as surely as water runs downhill. Because of the hierarchical command structure of paramilitary organizations, it takes only a vague turn of phrase or a certain tone by a high level commander to convey unspoken--with the reason for it being unspoken understood as well; these people aren't fools--that the rules of engagement translate to "take no prisoners", while outwardly performing the dance of "plausable deniability".
Politicians are liars. And their minions are liars. Politics itself is a sort of overt conspiracy to do one thing, say another, and get away with it somehow. (Because the great majority of people powerless and/or ill-informed.)
You could waste your whole life fighting the bullies and the bullshit and never get anywhere. I suggest we get on with building a future in which they are irrelevant,... or better yet, history.
Best, Jeff Davis "Everything's hard till you know how to do it." Ray Charles