Gentlemen, Gentlemen...

[Rasputine <l43384@alfa.ist.utl.pt>]

	To any woman on the list (are there any?), please excuse the title
but I refered a feeling I have towards this word rather than other way.

	I've followed your discussion in the Kosova incident and thoughted
to my self, using a little of my "intlectual arrogancy" that most didn't
quite understand one of Junger's valuble lessons. This statment is open to
discussion evidently but let me, anyway, justifie my words. I see Junger
as an aesthetic mentor, looking for beauty and acting primarily has an
observer of human History (not Human history, because it implies
something as an "Human" pseudoentity which does not exist). 

	The question is that although I see most of you showing yourselfs as
intelligent and of most open thought what happens is that allmost all
jugdments presented show someone barricated in some ideal or utopic
notion, untouchable and of most sacred nature. Having acess to history has
I know most of you have and, foremost, having read Junger, I find amusing
the need to judge situations according to some faint concept like "Human
rights" or the vality or not of some "Governating model". What is this
enforcement you are trying to do? From where come the justification of
what you defend, where do you get that this is better than that?

	Gentlemen I know my words can be assumed as one's of a presumptous
fellow (and they are in certain aways) but what I'm point out is that I
believe some of you lost an important quality (quality in my opinion of
course), that of smilling when you lose a game because your adversary
cheated. Because cheat, of course, is part of the game.

			Greetings,
		           
                              Ricardo Reis

			      "NON SERVIAM"