🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Jul9.165537.988@pbhya.PacBell.COM> whheydt@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt) writes:
>In article <1992Jul8.194010.21715@morrow.stanford.edu> karish@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish) writes:
>
>The question then becomes:  If actions that only damage inanimate
>objects fails to cause the changes that a group wants, will such a
>group (or individuals within the group) decide that stronger action
>has become neccesary?
>
>>The device in question was very much an antipersonnel weapon,
>>nails embedded in an explosive compound.  I'd never heard
>>EarthFirst! even accused of advocating use of such weapons
>>before the Oakland incident.
>
>>EarthFirst!'s antagonists in Northern California have not
>>shied away from violence.  This "logic" fits actions to be
>>expected from them better than it fits EarthFirst!.
>
>On the face of it, if an attempt were made by EF antagonists in No.
>Calif., I'd've expected them to have been shot while driving along a
>rural road.  Bombs aren't very characteristic of the EF opponets,
>either.

A small addendum to my own remarks . . .

A bomb is a very indiscriminate weapon.  In that sense, it is a
consistent escalation of prior EF activity (that of targeting classes
rather than individuals) than of EFs opponents.

	--Hal
-- 
Hal Heydt                    |    "Boycott Time-Warner"
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |         --J. Danforth Quayle
510-823-5447                 |    "... kill all the lawyers."
whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |         --William Shakespeare