politicophile

In another thread on this board, Yakk made the previous comment. I happen to disagree with it, but that is not the issue I wish to discuss here.

Let's assume that Yakk in entirely correct and that Pat Robertson is, in fact, more dangerous than Osama bin Laden. Now, I am generally against assassination as a concept: I feel it is dishonorable and immoral in most circumstances. There are a few individuals, however, that should be/have been assassinated. On this list, I would put Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Osama bin Laden, and a few others.

Recall that we have already accepted Yakk's view that Pat Robertson is more dangerous than Osama bin Laden, that more people are threatened by his existence than Osama's. The good news is that Pat Robertson hasn't started the killing yet: there is still time to prevent all that death and destruction. We must assassinate Pat Robertson as soon as possible.

[/modest proposal]

__________________
The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error. ~John Stuart Mill, On Liberty