Yeah, but Richard also thought the forking of Squeak was a good 
idea.  :-)

As there, I think Richard's sentiments, while clearly well-intended, are 
greatly misguided.

Stephen was not arguing so much against reflection and introspection as 
against the suggestion that the evil of this obscenity can be overlooked 
for any "reasons" raised in its defense.  Stephen was suggesting that 
the nature of the act, in and of itself, was of such enormity as to make 
irrelevant to the culpability of its perpetrators any purported 
justifications.  He is, of course, quite correct: How can the 
indifferent murder of thousands of innocents, requiring detailed 
planning and cold, monstrous calculation in its execution, be justified 
or excused?

It cannot.  Such conduct is, on its face, unforgivable and wholly evil.

It is entirely unnecessary --for purposes of justice-- to contemplate 
any reasons purporting to account for the act.  The premeditated murder 
of thousands directly, and indirectly hundreds more of our bravest and 
best, cannot have been in self-defense, nor been undertaken in the "heat 
of passion," as those justifications are understood in Western 
jurisprudence.

It is, of course, useful for other purposes to understand motives of an 
enemy who would do this, perhaps to better anticipate how to prevent 
them from doing further harm and to apprehend them -- but for no other 
reasons that come to mind.

Their "reasons" are otherwise irrelevant.  Appeasement for terrorism is 
not an option.  However, our reasons and justifications for our conduct 
must, as Richard suggested, be carefully considered.  On the other hand, 
apart from strategic and tactical planning, which is quite hard, this is 
not anywhere near a close question.

On Monday, September 17, 2001, at 07:10  PM, Richard A. O'Keefe wrote:

> Stephen Pair wrote:
>
> 	Cees, if you think that I, as an American, am going to stop for even a
> 	second and ponder why this act was committed, you are sorely mistaken.
> 	My only concern in this matter is justice.
> 	
> This is getting us even further off topic, but
> HOW THE HELL CAN WE HAVE JUSTICE WITHOUT PONDERING?
>
> It is *essential* to understand why the act was committed in order to
> take *effective* steps to stop further deaths of the innocent.  It is
> precisely the refusal to ponder on *both* sides which has brought us
> this far.  I fully agree that the people who did this dreadful thing 
> must
> be brought to justice.  But what should be done to stop other people
> wanting to do the same kind of thing?
>
> Wars have a terrible habit of killing even more innocent people, and
> laying up hatred for more wars in the future.  (Like WWI leading to 
> WWII.)
> That isn't justice.
>
> If I became dictator of this country, I would do two things:
>
> 1.  Cause to be written in large letters in the House of Parliament and
>     in every court this quotation from Oliver Cromwell:
>
> 	Brethren, I beseech you in the bowels of Christ,
> 	CONSIDER IT POSSIBLE THAT YOU MAY BE WRONG.
>
> 2.  Resign.