Reply #16: But That Is Not What Is At Issue, Sir [View All]

[The Magistrate]

One item that is at issue is why, if the misbehavior is general, so great a proportion of the condemnation for misbehavior is aimed in only one direction. If the condemnation is not as general as the misbehavior, then different standards are being applied in judging the behavior of the various participants, and we are back to the uncomfortable implications of such a practice outlined above.

One item that is at issue is the view that one side is violating standards because the other has done so first, which is something of a schoolyard interpretation of something much more involvd and serious. "Peoples' War" by its very nature immerses the active militants in a supportive yet non-combatant populace: the cover these provide are absolutely essential to its practice. It is not possible to engage the active militants without involvement of non-combatants. To ignore this, and to treat what is done in combating an opponent employing such techniques as either a simple exercise in crimes against non-combatants, or as being criminal just because the other side did it first, is to miss the point of the entire exercise. Because it is an openly stated element of the practice of the technique to ensure such harm to the non-combatant populace, and seek political and propaganda profit by it, doing this is tantamount to taking sides, and not as a reasoned choice, but as the object of a successful deception employed by one party to the conflict.

"Revolution is not a tea party."