A Week of Terror, Hypocrisy, and Shame

Terrorists: I have thought for years, and am now more than ever convinced, that terrorists should be treated as spies caught along the front lines during a war. They do not wear uniforms—indeed, those who penetrated several civilian targets in Mumbai had deliberately dressed like ordinary vacationers, for obvious reasons. They do not observe any rules of war: on the contrary, today’s terrorist (e.g., Mumbai once again) specifically targets non-combatants over armed and trained soldiers. They are random butchers, the most despicable gleanings of our sad human race. When caught red-handed, they should be summarily executed. There should be no trial. Round up a firing squad, march them down the nearest alley, shoot them, and bury their bodies in unmarked graves at an unknown location.

This would accomplish three things. 1) It would perhaps dissuade a few terrorists of the weaker-hearted or longer-headed variety, if there are any. 2) It would certainly put a stop to any bargaining for captured and imprisoned terrorists, often the source of further terrorism as comrades in thuggery seek to acquire hostages for trade. 3) It would send very clearly throughout society the message that this crime is unique; it is not an especially brutal species of murder nor even a renegade species of making war, but rather slaughter without any motive whatever related to the individual victim (hence not murder) and aggression without any declaration or any focus on the other side’s formal defenders (hence not war).

Some will object that my recommendation is as brutal as the terrorist act itself. These people need to awaken from rhetoric to reality; or if they prefer an imaginary world, then they need to imagine having their own child hauled from among the corpses left by a terrorist explosion. It is such misplaced and grotesque “humanity” as theirs which will cause yet more children to be mangled and killed. Still other critics, from the opposite direction, will object that captured terrorists can provide vital intelligence when “questioned”. We should remember, however, that such intelligence (usually marginal, sometimes completely bogus) is paid for in innocent lives that might have been saved if society’s absolute intolerance of terrorism were communicated more forcefully. Furthermore, on a practical note, there’s no better questioning technique than blowing away a queue of butchers until one of them caves in as his turn comes. Since execution is instant and graves are unmarked, the ringleaders in the mountains or the jungle will have no way of knowing who has been spared, if anyone.

The “Fairness” Doctrine: Will there be yet another push in the Democrat-dominated Congress to muzzle radio talk-show celebrities like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity? Very possibly. The assumption of profound thinkers like Harry Reid and Nancy Pellosi is clearly that the general public is too stupid to sort through diverse utterances and arrive at the truth. When I’m listening to Rush and can no longer digest one of his highly seasoned offerings, I turn him off. This, we are forced to conclude, is an heroic act of which few Americans are capable. Instead, they sit still for the termination of their brainwashing, mesmerized and powerless.

What I find particularly and insufferably hypocritical about this line of reasoning is its complete inconsistency with said Democrats’ position on an amnesty bill for illegal aliens. They are unconcerned, apparently, about bestowing the right to vote upon millions whose education ended at grade school (if not before) and who cannot even speak mainstream Spanish, let alone English… but the voting public submitted to Limbaugh’s poisoned tirades must be safeguarded by all means feasible. I recently heard Enrique Krauze, author of El Poder y el Delirio (about the crazed Ugo Chavez), eloquently insist on Galavision—broadcast from Mexico City—that every view in a democracy must be allowed expression, no matter how absurd or offensive. A Mexican socialist holds freedom of speech in higher regard than dozens of members of the US Congress… hardly surprising, really; for the Mexican knows what life is like when speech is suppressed.

Black Friday: Will Christians rise up one fine year and take Christmas back? Why do we bicker over this or that city council which has decided to delete from parade floats and courthouse decorations any “insensitive” word like… well, anything containing “Christ” in it? Why, I say, do we get so exercised about such silly theatrics while people are quite literally being stampeded to death in the mass’s quest after Christmas goodies? Could a more damning indictment of our faith’s hollowness and our society’s greed be thought up by the most imaginative Shi’ite propagandist? Of course, such outbursts are not an expression of our faith at all—but we should make this known more clearly. These annual debauches pass beyond national disgrace to a defamation of the God we claim to hold sacred when we can do no more than cluck, “Oh, the poor man!” as we ourselves squeeze past the gurney through Wal-Mart’s doors. Remember that St. Paul actually spilled a good little bit of ink in his epistles advising the faithful not to put an example before public scrutiny which would be attributed—fairly or otherwise—to the entire body of the faithful. We should clean this mess up.