To: A. Geiche who wrote (475823 ) 10/15/2003 1:17:59 AM From: Dan B. Respond to of 769670 Re: "Violence is not to be undertaken by private persons." Sure it is. Self-defense is a recognized justification. Re: "If a state or administration acts without due and visible attention to agreed international process, it acts in a way analogous to a private person." Aside from the fact that visible attention was given to agreed international process, and irrespective of "due" consideration, this is correct; we do act analogously to a private person(if "due" means full agreement of all national "private persons" before acting, then certainly "due" was indeed not given), . Re: "It purports to be judge of its own interest." Obviously correctly so, since the judgement of others is aside from, not naturally superior to, and not controlling of one's own judgement. Re: "While terrorism must always be condemned, it was wrong to assume its perpetrators were “devoid of political rationality.” There was no assumption, but rather a stark and highly verifiable observation. Reason cannot suffer any party which consistently and overtly seeks the death of those who don't conform to a preferred religious philosophy. Re: "It is possible to use unspeakably wicked means to pursue an aim that is shared by those who would not dream of acting in the same way..." When reason and patience has been tried without result as bad actors insist upon death even for those of differing voices within their own religion, those who then still would not dream of acting as America has, become pacifists, and self-defense against utterly murderous stubborn persistence becomes the essence of any practical means of survival and of reason. Preemptive offense becomes the only significantly helpful defense option remaining. There is no one-world governing authority, yet. Perhaps there should be, but so long as a "private person" has become murderous, the pacifism of others ought never be allowed nor expected to be the determining factor in one's own death. Dan B.