On 03/10/13 23:45, jindq1 wrote: > Question to Cody: Do you think if he did it, that it was right to
> do it? Would you have done the same thing? (Forget the FBI, that's
> not the discussion, the discussion is murder/attempted murder for
> the reasons outlined).
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 10:40 PM, Cody R Wilson
> <codywilson@??? <mailto:codywilson@utexas.edu>> wrote:
>
> I'm not surprised by the appeal to the norm of sanity. Before we
> are tempted much more to despair by the prevailing ethical
> ideology, I recommend this work by Mr. Badiou:
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CDkQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aeogea.com%2Fpdf_library%2Fbooks%2F713303226_badiou-ethics-an-essay-on-the-understanding-of-evil.pdf&ei=t-FNUp7cE4Gm9ATN_oCIBw&usg=AFQjCNG6DTNkWvMPYraqMnvamrdis746Ag&bvm=bv.53537100,d.eWU >
> On Oct 3, 2013 4:27 PM, "Cody R Wilson" <codywilson@???
> <mailto:codywilson@utexas.edu>> wrote:
>
> Isn't a situational ethics required here? There is the pre-existing
> evil of the organized violence of the state. A fixed moral
> imperative is here a tool that serves the master. Just like how
> 'Human Rights' is the motto du jour for organized bombing.
> Self-preservation almost demanded he act as he did, assuming he
> did.
>
> How is that a monstrous conclusion?
>
> Couldn't agree more Amir: we need to promote the values of respect
> for other people's lives. Where the FBI will seek to take his away
> for his mistakes, we cannot support his promotion just because he
> "stood for something good". He made the mistakes that proved his
> *lack* of values (assuming all evidence is accurate). The FBI,
> although a rotten snotball of power abusers, they didn't need to
> work on this one-- he handed it to them like a child molesting
> Catholic priest handing an anti-religion argument to an Athiest. We
> should all bow our heads in shame that we did not seek to out him
> sooner, befriend him, and be there for him when he was thinking
> murder was a solution. Additionally, we should seek to find more
> evidence, follow the trials, and continue to discuss-- but blindly
> follow a murderer because we don't like the FBI? Rationality
> unfortunately doesn't work like that. Let's pick our battles, shall
> we?
>
> Matthew
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 10:14 PM, Amir Taaki <genjix@???
> <mailto:genjix@riseup.net>> wrote:
>
> Utopian paradises are a fantasy. But right now I know who the
> biggest murderer and threat to human freedom / expression on the
> earth is. And it's not a small time mafia that was a threat to the
> big time mafias.
>
> These what if questions divert from focusing on what you're
> struggling for. They're imaginary scenarios until they're actually
> possible.
>
> Also we need to move beyond promoting ideologies, and into
> promoting values.
>
> On 03/10/13 23:07, jindq1 wrote:
>> I am very skeptical of initiatives to keep things
> "anonymous", and
>> given that bitcoin empowers people like never before to
> anonymous
>> order hits on each other, it does beg to question: Who the
> fuck
>> would want to live in a society where absolutely anyone
> with some
>> money could kill anyone else, and anonymously, all without
> leaving
>> their home PC? In a libertarian paradise, this guy would
> not only
>> have killed someone, we never would have known about it.
> (Yes, I
>> understand it was a trap by the FBI).
>
>
>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 9:19 PM, Amir Taaki
> <genjix@??? <mailto:genjix@riseup.net>
>> <mailto:genjix@riseup.net <mailto:genjix@riseup.net>>> wrote:
>
>> Apologists, know who your true oppressor is.
>
>> We don't need to moralise that murder to protect thousands
> is OK,
>> or that murder is wrong (like in superhero movies).
>
>> The FBI entrapped him. By falling into this trap of condemning
>> DPR, you are operating in the frame set by the FBI. You are
>> allowing them to steer the argument.
>
>> I stand with Ross Ulbricht.
>
>
> http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1nn6h8/dprs_accusations_of_murder_for_hire_only_reveal/ >
>
>> On 03/10/13 22:15, jadair wrote:
>>> I agree this thread is inappropriate for Lifeboat and for the
>>> objectives of this group.
>
>>> On Thursday, October 3, 2013 2:55:20 PM UTC-4, mike wrote:
>
>>> Operated, for now, by me:
>
>
>
> https://www.rossulbricht.org/introducing-the-ross-ulbricht-legal-defense-fund/ >
>
>
>
>
> <https://www.rossulbricht.org/introducing-the-ross-ulbricht-legal-defense-fund/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>> _______________________________________________ unSYSTEM
> mailing
>>> list: http://unsystem.net >>>
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem >
>> _______________________________________________ unSYSTEM
> mailing
>> list: http://unsystem.net >
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem >
>
>
>
>> _______________________________________________ unSYSTEM
> mailing
>> list: http://unsystem.net >
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem >
> _______________________________________________ unSYSTEM mailing
> list: http://unsystem.net > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem >
>
>
> _______________________________________________ unSYSTEM mailing
> list: http://unsystem.net > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem >
>
> _______________________________________________ unSYSTEM mailing
> list: http://unsystem.net > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________ unSYSTEM mailing
> list: http://unsystem.net > https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/unsystem >
::
Re: [unSYSTEM] Introducing the Ulbr…
