>I find Michael Wright's posting puzzling. He states that
>Weatherman had no mass base of support, but uses this
>assertion to make the point that it ought to have engaged
>in less unsubtle "shrieking" and more disciplined guerilla
> violence, like the IRA. I find it hard to see how that change
> in tactics would have done anything to win over even a
>semblance of popular support, without which revolutionary
>activity cannot be differentiated from simple terrorism.
Pardon me, but I just hate to be misquoted -- particularly
when it is illegal activities being discussed.
I did not say that the Weathermen should have engaged
in "disciplined guerilla violence." I said that the Weathermen
would have done well to study the IRA and similar groups.
After providing an example of IRA coded communication,
as described to me by an Irish immigrant, I concluded with
this statement: " I cannot imagine the shrieking Weathermen
engaging in such subtlety." I clearly did not think the
Weathermen capable of conducting a campaign like the
IRA's, nor did I think the conditions in the USA were appro-
priate for it.
And now I think I'll be signin' off an' goin' to the pub where I'll
have me a wee Black'n'Tan (drink, that is).
-- Michael Wright