Sunday, July 29, 2007


But of course they stand for social justice and all. Case in point:
The real scandal isn’t that the US has locked up suspects at Guantanamo Bay, but that it’s let so many of them go free - free to resume their terrorism:

AT LEAST 30 former Guantanamo Bay detainees have been killed or recaptured taking up arms against allied forces following their release.

They have been discovered mostly in Afghanistan and Pakistan, but not in Iraq, a US Defence Department spokesman told The Age yesterday…

His comments follow the death this week of Taliban commander and former detainee Abdullah Mehsud, who reportedly blew himself up rather than surrender to Pakistani forces. In December 2001, Mehsud was captured in Afghanistan and held at Guantanamo Bay until his release in March 2004. He later became the Taliban chief for South Waziristan.

How many people have now been murdered by fanatics set free from Guantanamo Bay, at the urging of so many civil libertarians and Leftist activists?

How many deaths do those civil libertarians now have on their conscience?

The usual definition of a civil libertarian is a person who is actively concerned with the protection of individual civil liberties and civil rights. Now, "civil liberties" is the name given to those freedoms that completely protect the individual from government; and civil liberties set limits for government so that it can not abuse its power and interfere with the lives of its citizens.

I would suggest that those individuals who are preoccupied with the US treatment of non-citizen, enemy combatants and prisoners of war are only civil libertarians in some abstract, perverted sense of the word.

If they were truly concerned with such issues, then they would be having a fit when Iran incarcerates American and British citizens for trumped up charges of espionage; or when Lebanon kidnaps Israeli soldiers and hold for a year or more. Or, they might even concern themselves with the barbaric treatment the civil libertarians of Al Qaeda afford those unfortunate souls it captures.

Alternatively, they might concern themselves with the overt abuse of government in situations such as this one are laws such as this are passed. Or in the inherent abuse of civil liberties under enforced multicultural (i.e., idiotic) political correctness.

But these so-called civil libertarians are really only leftist activists and apparently they do not concern themselves unduly with such issues. They only care about the rights of terrorists and the rights of enemies of the U.S. They would, if they could, grant all of them the benefit of U.S. citizenship. They only care about the civil liberties of those who want to kill Americans--that's how wonderful and compassionate and caring they are.

In lieu of granting citizenship to every terrorist thug we capture, I'm all for following the Geneva Convention to the letter (sadly, the animals we face did not sign said treaty and feel no compunction whatsoever in taking murder and torture to ever higher and disgusting levels).

But unless and until we give these terrorists the same rights as any US citizen, the left will not be satisfied. Their sense of moral outrage is engendered by alleged incidents like Koran flushing, but not, it seems, by incidents of beheading. That tells me all I need to know about the so-called "morality" of the left, who fancy themselves champions of the oppressed. Enablers of everything evil is more like.

Ayn Rand wrote in Atlas Shrugged: "The only proper purpose of a government is to protect man's rights, which means: to protect him from physical violence. A proper government is only a policeman, acting as an agent of man's self-defense, and, as such, may only resort to force only against those who start the use of force."

In other words, Guantanamo, is not any abuse of the US government's power; on the contrary, it is an appropriate use of the that power (particularly during war) to protect its citizens from those who are actively using force to try to harm them.

The compassionate leftist activists, so concerned with human rights and social justice, in this case (and many others) merely represent yet another example of the narcissistic sociopathy (also called "malignant narcissism") that dominates the mind of today's poltical left.

The typical leftist collectivist, considers his or her sociopathy as a form of altruism, or "selflessness", however; and they score big points from the self-esteeem and PC gurus for protesting against the proper use of government to protect its citizens; even as they agitate for the use of its coercive power to implement their own agenda (not anyone else's, of course).

They don't want the government to be coercive when it comes to dealing with those who want to kill and destroy us; but they have no trouble accepting coercion when it serves to advance their own ideology. Another contradictory discourse that is all in a day's work for today's political left.

UPDATE: Michelle Malkin has more. As she points out:
Savvy Democrats ought to be questioning the Bush administration’s mass release of Saudi detainees given such analysis. But they’re all too busy pressing for the immediate closure of Gitmo and the full liberation of every last detainee from the facility.

Democrats: For freeing jihadists faster.

Put that on a bumper sticker.

No comments: