Two Non-Disagreements

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Thu, 16 Jul 2009 18:27:07 GMT  <== Politics ==> 

Larken Rose - an explanation of two "disagreements" that some people think Mr. Rose and Stefan Molyneux had in their July 4 speeches. Self defense is always moral, whether your attacker is from the gummint or not, but it isn't always practical. And this:

Personally, I think a vastly preferable method of "national security" in a free society (which probably wouldn't call itself a "nation") is assassination. By the tyrant rules, the various megalomaniacs often send pawn to kill pawn, leaving both clubs of control freaks intact. I think every time any "government" starts a war, the most effective, and most moral approach, is to send in a few assassins to blow the "leader's" damn head off. And if his successor continues down the same path, do it again. If THEY were the ones risking everything by their megalomaniacal designs, they might think twice. Right now, they have nothing to lose, since the club of world tyrants has an OPEN agreement to not kill each other, but to only kill each other's pawns.

AP anyone?

Add comment Edit post Add post

Comments (1):


Submitted by J.E. Andreasen on Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:15:17 GMT

For whom the bell tolls... <g>

Edit comment