<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Thursday, April 14, 2005

LIBERAL DEFENDS TERRORIST, CONDEMNS GOVERNMENT 
A sledgehammer for a nut, Simon Jenkins, Times of London

If you want to see how stupid the terrorism policy of the left is, just click the link to the above opinion piece. The author, Simon Jenkins, in classic liberal freakout mode, tries to downplay the terrorist threat posed by Kamel Bourgass, who, when captured in Britain, was actively trying to produce chemical weapons (ricin). It's also worth noting that Bourgass stabbed a policeman to death prior to being taken into custody.

Although the author acknowledges that Bourgass is "clearly dangerous," he downplays just how dangerous, noting that Bourgass just had a bunch of ingredients used to produce ricin, and that it would have taken "tremendous effort" to convert them into the actual chemical weapon. Further, the author discounts Bourgass' connections to al-Qaeda, claiming that these connections were discovered through torturing CIA agents. In the end, the author claims that British politicos are the real terrorists, not people like Bourgass.

This is a perfect example of the liberal approach on terrorism. If an attack hasn't happened yet, then the government is going "too far" and "violating our freedoms" in trying to prevent it. For example, the liberals would have argued that the 9/11 hijackers were "just flight students, who add diversity to our flight schools," had they been arrested before 9/11. On the other hand, if the attack has already happened, then it becomes the fault of the nearest conservative politician, who should have "done more" to ensure that the attack was prevented. Nevermind that "doing more" would have resulted in the "going too far" response.

I think we should call the liberal philosophy on terror the "circular approach." If not that, then just plain stupid.
Comments: Post a Comment

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?