What you said was that the intent of the terrorists was justified, but you disagreed with their strategy. Leo is right that you are a morally outside of any political comradeship with me. What you also said:
1. The people of the Middle East - if they are the perpetrators - have a right to fight back, and this was certainly an audacious blow against the imperialist heartland
8. The perpetrators had no other power than the productive capacity of US capital, turned against itself, and their own determination;
9. The West has operated a foreign policy modelled on permanent war- footing, it would be surprising if it did not provoke a reaction;
14. Public sympathy in European capitals will be tinged by Schadenfreude that the US has finally got its comeuppance
But then you're consistent. Dead bodies from Kosovo to Rwanda are meaningless to you except so far as they serve your ideological axes to grind.
Nathan Newman nathan at newman.org http://www.nathannewman.org ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Heartfield" <Jim at heartfield.demon.co.uk>
In his self-confessed 'rage' Leo has lost control of his senses
What I actually wrote was:
"2. Terrorism is an anti-democratic by-passing of the masses
3. It would be infantile to take vicarious pleasure in a strike against New York that was delivered by an unseen hand;
and,
4. The possibilities of generalising this as a blow against US imperialism are pretty low;"
I don't blame Leo for being emotional, but emotional people don't generally talk a lot of sense. -- James Heartfield