Would bin Laden Eat a Pork Chop? Did John Ashcroft Behead Daniel Pearl?
Silly me: I thought the head of the House Intelligence Committee (Silvestre Reyes) -- no matter what his ethnicity -- should be, well, intelligent. I thought he should have some understanding of the nature of the threat that intelligence seeks to mitigate.
Overall, I still don't know what materials Steve Kurtz had in his petri dishes, or whether it's illegal to possess or transmit them. If it was, then he should bear the consequences. If not, then he has little to fear, other than the exorbitant fees charged by left-wing lawyers. I have no idea how he stands on terrorism (mass murder), whether he's for it or against it. If he's for it, then I wish him ill. If he's against it, then it may be time for him to so indicate.
Somehow, I believe Steve Kurtz reverences his status as a victim. Anyone whose art emphasizes strange microorganisms can probably use all the publicity he gets.
On torture: It may be that someone like Khalid Sheik Muhammed (KSM), who reportedly beheaded reporter Daniel Pearl and "masterminded" 9/11, was tortured. If it resulted in gathering useful information from him, THEN I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH IT. He has engaged in illegal and vile acts (to say the least) against American civilians, and as a foreign national he should have no rights under the U. S. Constitution, for which he has such contempt. The fact that he hates GWB, as do all known liberals, doesn't make KSM a good guy.
I hope to see him tried by a military tribunal and executed, preferably by a stone-wielding mob. Period. There are several others in that category. Good riddance to them all. Whatever punishment they get, it isn't cruel and inhuman enough.
My strong belief, after living on this earth and paying close attention for many years, is that most people on the far left are in fact indifferent to the real evils of the world -- to the suffering and death of people propagandized, tortured, starved, and killed by tyrants, most of them in our time adherents to the Muslim faith, in countries like Iran, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Uganda, Sudan, Saudi Arabia, and many other lands.
My view is that the people indifferent to evil -- ones I call the extreme liberals -- invent a "virtual world," where mass murder is somehow justified because it's -- in some bizarre and complex way -- really the fault of George Bush, Dick Cheney, John Ashcroft, and Exxon/Mobil. The leftists' virtual world, the real one turned on its head, is really an extreme use of their human brains to do what those organs do: process and simplify stimuli in such a way as to make sense of things. If everything bad that happens -- from 9/11 to the unhappy situation of Steve Kurtz to global warming -- is really the fault of George Bush (with help from Monsanto), then it becomes easily understamdable and quickly fixable. It makes the world as simple as second-grade arithmetic.
The fix is to get rid of George Bush and all those Darth Vaders masquerading as "neocons." Neocons want a world in which democracy and human rights prevail in all lands. How dare they! Supposedly, they've wrecked the Constitution, but somehow I don't see anybody leaving. In fact, I see the tired, poor, and huddled masses yearning to get into the U.S. by any means possible. "If we build a fence, they will climb it."
On habeas corpus: During the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln -- unlike John Ashcroft -- suspended it, and if it saved the nation, he was right to do so. It has never in the history of humankind applied to enemy combatants, basically people illegally engaged in murder on a grand scale. The Patriot Act was passed by Congress and signed by the President of the U.S. It is the law of the land, and it is a good one. It basically harms no one not engaged in some form of violence against the U.S. or otherwise in support of worldwide terrorism (Al Qaida, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and the like).
On the law of the land: many years ago, Justice Arthur Goldberg said of the U. S. Consitution: "It is not a suicide pact." When terrorists game the Constitution, that is, use hard-won freedoms to undermine freedom, then it must be modified to protect the safety and lives of the American people. To me, that's one of those truths that are "self-evident." I think even Jefferson would come around on that one.
I told my wife years ago that I didn't want to see bin Laden "brought to justice." I feared an endless trial, where some non-cadaverous version of the Right Rev. Johnnie Cochran would prance around reciting something like "If the 747 flies, the bad people dies."
If there were a trial, I fear some terrible incident revolving around the prison's serving of pork chops. I fear some patriotric guard putting his Koran not in the toilet but where the sun don't shine. I fear Madison Avenue getting carried away with the "bin Laden look." I fear some minor-league basketball team drafting the tall terrorist. I fear Steve Kurtz and the CAE cavorting outside the courthouse in an orgy of "participative art." I fear bin Laden motoring off in a white Bronco. I fear the implacable wrath of the Arab-American [sic] League.
Instead, I wanted some USMC "grunt" to bring justice to him, planting a bullet right between UBL's vacant eyes, penetrating his dwarfed brain, and sending him directly to Hell, where 70 rouged hookers in black stockings would be waiting to force him into unspeakable acts.
After that, even dour John Ashcroft might be moved to don a tee-shirt containing the words: "Let's Party!"