Detainees of Political Correctness 
RSS Feed
|
 Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Peter King (R-NY), has launched terrorism hearings. Rep. King received knee-jerk condemnation from wannabe-PC liberals who liken his investigation to a McCarthy Era commie witch hunt, predictably attacking Pete King as anti-Muslim in the process. The House and Senate have held a combined 22 hearings on the radicalization of American Muslims in the last five years but had it not been for the shellacking this past November this one might be allowed to proceed with as little controversy as those conducted by moderates including Susan Collins, Jane Harman, and Joe Lieberman. To say that homeland security efforts have been dangerously regressive under Barack Obama is an understatement! The administration and its supporters have been unwilling to see terrorism for what it is and for who is responsible.
| "I'm well aware that the announcement of these hearings has generated considerable controversy and opposition...Let me make it clear today that I remain convinced that these hearings must go forward, and they will. To back down would be a craven surrender to political correctness and an abdication of what I believe to be the main responsibility of this committee -- to protect America from a terrorist attack." - Rep. Peter King |
The following rant was written 3/15/09...
|
According to the so-called Geneva Conventions the following criteria and more must be met before the humanitarian POW rights prescribed are afforded to those prisoners captured "on the battlefield"...
-
Captured combatants must be part of a uniformed fighting force.
-
Weaponry must be surrendered from open display upon capture.
-
Combatants must belong to a military command structure.
-
The POW's nation must be a signer of the Geneva Conventions.
It is reasonable to assume, since neither Yemen, Pakistan, Morocco, Iran, Syria nor any other nation is willing to openly sponsor, let alone uniform those who have hither-to-fore been known as "terrorists" and "enemy combatants", that the miscreants themselves assume full responsibility for their own individual actions.
While some detained terrorists may have caved-in under aggressive interrogation there is no record of any captured Islamofacist ever renouncing his or her original pledge of maximum death and destruction to America and its allies. Terrorists are prepared to accept whatever fate befalls them when they are captured. Many, perhaps most, have demanded martyrdom by capital punishment.
Like other criminals, a substantial percentage of these menaces to civilization revert to the same -- or worse -- criminal activity when their period of incarceration ends. Unfortunately, in the case of released terrorists, there is no parole officer and no GPS ankle bracelet; not even a "career felon" policy in place that would allow for the key to be thrown away when hard-core recidivists are recaptured in the act of doing what they do.
It bears repeating that the single mission of each and every terrorist being detained at Gitmo (and less cushy but less controversial camps in other parts of the world) is the perpetration of maximum death and destruction upon you and me and the fabric of our American society -- regardless of our individual political, religious, philosophical and sexual preferences.
Do you honestly believe that the closure of Gitmo, the "sitting down to talk" with terrorist sympathizers and their financial backers, the legitimization of despicable acts of terror as mere chargeable offenses in our courts or the politically correct deletion of words like enemy and terrorist from the way we classify those sworn to eliminate us will foment even the slightest change in their brutal philosophy?
If terrorists were given the opportunity to run POW facilities for American detainees, torture up to the moment of beheading would never be taken off the table as a means of extracting intel from GI's and private US citizens.
Do you think the War on Terror is over just because the current administration doesn't allow it to be called that anymore?
You can blame anyone you want in an effort to turn your back on the most important issue of our generation, but Islamofacist terrorism (or whatever euphemism for it that you prefer to use) has the potential to destroy us -- not merely hinder our progress or burden future generations with extended financial discomfort.
Terrorism is not a political issue. If it were, Political Correctness might be a reasonable part of the discussion.
eddobloggo home
| SCROLL DOWN TO ADD A COMMENT |