So by that token, everyone in a position of leadership in the US government is morally reposnsible for say, the bombing of a wedding party in aghanistan. you wouldnt be suggesting some sort of collective reponsibility would you? Strange stance for an individualist such as yourself to take. Taken I guess for political and ideological reasons.
Oh please bear in mind that I dont condone or defend political violence, quite the opposite. but i am willing to accept that people can change their views over time, and indeed become valuable members of society in later years.
Martin McGuinness for instance, a far bigger bastard than any weatherman, the military leader of a far more hienous group of political murderers then those penny ante militants, is now Deputy First Minister of Norther Ireland.
Let me make it even easier, Schlack. Is George Bush morally responsible for the devastation in Iraq as a result of his un-necessary invasion of that counry? In ten years time, will George Bush still be morally responsible for what took place in Iraq as a result of the un-necessary invasion? How about some of its cheerleaders? Wolfewitz? Kristol? Biden? Cheney?
How about former NAZIs that escaped punishment and became valuable members of society until being caught -- assuming of course, that they had "changed their views over time"?
Yours,
Issodhos
