Headline for 2005: "Please Kill Us!!!"
Does that sound like an odd thing to say? Would a sane person actually request that his life be ended at someone else's hands? One would imagine not, and yet that seems to be all we are hearing from the chattering class.Is this a gross oversimplification? Unfortunately, no, it isn't. Here's the latest example: Bush has allowed that he authorized wiretaps on phone calls to and/or from suspected Al-Qaeda members, and the "Bush is Satan" crowd is screaming bloody murder. The wiretaps are illegal and immoral, they claim, and they are now tossing around the idea of impeachment with a gusto not seen since the time Bush declared "Mission Accomplished" on that aircraft carrier.
There's a few problems with this reaction, of course, the first of which is that the wiretaps don't appear to be illegal at all. Since there's some confusion about the authority they come under, a phalanx of opportunists is spewing forth their interpretations (generally ill-informed) of the law which finds Bush guilty.
What is behind this hand-wringing? The desire to protect America's enemies. If you are among this crowd, you are now saying to yourself that you are in fact not "against" America's enemies, you are simply in favor of civil liberties and so forth, and in fact, our "enemies" are not really enemies, they are actually just people oppressed by U.S. foreign policy whose hatred is justified.
Thus the theme for this year: "Please Kill Us" - the message from the self-proclaimed civil libertarians appears to be:
"Terrorists have legitimate grievances, so they must be afforded the same rights as Americans. We must never monitor their phone conversations, spy on them, or do anything that in any way restricts their freedom to plan and carry out terrorist activities. Along these lines, we must also swear in writing that we will never use undue influence to try and get information from captives in custody, lest we should appear to be 'torturing' them, in which case, even if actual American lives could be saved from a terrorist attack by shaking down a terrorist, it is the morally superior position to let those Americans die."
"This is also true on airplanes, and any other public conveyance or gathering location - racial profiling is such a heinous and horrible thing that again, even if a terrorist attack is suspected or imminent, it shall be illegal to stop people and question them on the basis of their appearance. Better that ten Americans die than one person (American or not) be subjected to racial profiling, and possible hurt feelings."
"Furthermore, the legitimate grievances that Osama Bin Laden and his followers have means that we should reverse American policy, and stop supporting Israel. Never mind that such "Support" amounts to little more than what every other country gets in American Foreign Aid, or that jews have representation in the Government, just as American Muslims could have if they so desired - the presence of such appearances means that we must grant Palestinians a state, and thus reward them for their slaughter of civilian men, women, and children. There is no need to think this through further, or what the implications might be of the imams who call not only for the Palestinian state and the right of return, but for the destruction of Israel and the elimination of jews in general. Although we compare Bush to Hitler regularly in an apparent reference to the atrocities committed by Adolf and the Nazis, we don't challenge people who call for the exact same type of pogroms today."
"In protecting such people and giving them what they want in the hope that they will leave us alone, we also believe that if we controlled foreign policy and could redistribute America's wealth to other countries in inverse proportion with the production levels of their economies and darkness of their skin color (in an attempt to absolve our guilt over the actions of fair-skinned people of years and years ago), that all would be well, and everyone in the world would shower us with praise. After all, our dear leader Michael Moore, in his response to the 9/11 massacres, expressed confusion that liberal/democrat people were being killed along with the horrible, evil conservative/republican people. We know that since we are the true and correct people that our view would prevail, if only we could impose it on everyone. No, we haven't yet figured out how to reconcile our support of the concept of homosexual marriage with the fundamentalist Islamic view that homosexuals should be killed, but we'll err on the side of danger if it gives an opportunity to take a swipe at Bush, the great satan."
Is this what you hear coming from the presses and the talking heads? If not, good for you. Just don't be surprised when you are murdered by a terrorist who was protected by your election of Kerry/Dean/Clinton, or whoever is hailed as the embodiment of "Moderation" and "Diplomacy" after George Bush is gone.
(DISCLAIMER: The author of this article is not a jew, so for those of you just starting to type out the word "Zionist" in your responses or comments, you'll have to use the excuse that I "Sold out" to the jews or have some other dubious ties to them. I don't have any, but here's what I do have, which is a summary observation: All the madness around the world that is claimed to be a direct result of the Israel/Palestinian conflagration is a crock of shit.)
posted by ET @ 2:01 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home