Posted on 06/20/2006 8:18:07 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher
Who has not seen images of terrorists, criminals, guerilla warfare soldiers, and others using civilians as human shields? There is an ironic mix of bravado and cowardice at the spectacle of some arrogant, boastful fool hiding behind the innocent, clueless, and defenseless. Usually that human shield is silent, terrified, and uninvolved in the coward’s cause. Only an imbecile, for example, would think that the toddler being held by a bank robber attempting escape was somehow a willing accomplice.
Well, as I have often stated, liberals are not without imagination or creativity. Leave it to our leftist friends to come up with an ingenious and innovative variation on the human shield theme.
Liberal Variation on an Idea
The obvious intent of a human shield is to protect evil, treachery, and cunning using pure innocence, and to create a conflict in the opponent. How does one attack the intended foe without harming the innocent shield? Conversely, using such a shield gives the coward the opportunity to harm with impunity, to attack without concern for response, and to further create an opportunity to divert any blame for harm to the shield on the opponent.
While liberals often take foolish and even imbecilic positions and contortions in defense of their drivel and agenda, one must never underestimate their actual cunning, treachery, and creativity. In fact, one constant that can always be count on with regard to liberals is their ability imaginatively to twist strategies and ideas to suit their own particular nature and purpose.
How have liberals added their own stamp on the familiar theme of human shielding? How about using human shields with their own related, albeit more individual agenda? Instead of using an infant crying for his milk why not use an infantile victim crying for his 15 minutes of public attention? Instead of using a defenseless and terrified victim why not use an aggressive and determined puppet? Instead of using someone who elicits concern why not use someone who elicits compassion and sympathy?
That, in a nutshell (appropriate term in this context), is human shielding, liberal style. Liberals have invented and discovered the use of human shields with their own agenda, their own speeches, and their own axes to grind. Furthermore, these shields are usually missing something, be it a husband, a wife, a son, daughter, father, or mother, a leg or arm, or the ability to walk. People who are missing something are usually looking for someone to blame, and thus liberals need only aim the human political missile toward George Bush or some other chosen conservative target.
If you think about it, this is truly an ingenious idea. It is like using a cute puppy to ward off bullets and then, when the moment is right, have that puppy turn into a vicious attack dog. It is like sending your senile grandma to tell your boss what he can do with your job. It is thinking like a liberal while pretending to be a noble, innocent, and selfless human being.
Application of an Idea
Shake hands with Cindy Sheehan, Anne Coulter’s 9/11 wives, Michael Berg, the Katrina victims, and crying illegal immigrants. These are but a few examples of recent liberal human shields. Please note that all of these have the common traits described above. All of these people have an agenda, a gripe, a missing part, and a thirst to blame someone for their plight. Each of these people elicits compassion and sympathy.
Certainly it must be terrible to lose a loved one or a home. Obviously it must be horrible to suddenly be disoriented or uncertain about the future. That is the beauty, the usefulness of these human shields. They are each a walking docudrama, a primetime propaganda piece with feet and, most importantly, a mouth. All that is needed is that final ingredient, that last touch, which is a thirst to blame someone conservative, usually George Bush or one of his cronies. After all, what good is an angry victim who wants to blame liberals, terrorists, or actual criminals?
Piece de Resistance
What takes the whole liberal invention and application of “victim spokespeople” used as human shields for their agenda and attacks on conservatives from a mere ingenious tactic to a brilliant strategic weapon is the fact that such victims are usually untouchable on a superficial, general level.
After all, few will want to attack someone who has lost a son or daughter, an orphan, a widow, or a homeless hurricane victim for fear of looking like a heartless demon. Few will complain about the angry wailings of such people, chalking these bitter words to understandable anger and resentment.
Liberals pride themselves in pretending to honor and feel compassion for suffering as long as it is for the right reasons and by the right people. I doubt that the MSM or some liberal politician will express sympathy for a sobbing woman expressing her indignation at being manipulated into an abortion or some bitter orphan of a woman lost on 9/11 expressing support for the war or Bush.
Never mind that these chosen victim spokespeople feel free to express their opinions, beliefs, views, suggestions, claims, and demands no matter how valid or absurd they may be. Never mind that one must separate their right to grieve or vent from their right to jam their biases and agendas up the public’s attention. Never mind that having the right to grieve does not therefore give one the divine right to propagandize or preach. Never mind that being a victim or suffering a loss does not automatically qualify one as an expert on anything but anger and resentment. Never mind that these people are neither the first, the last, nor the only victims of any of the misfortunes that fuel their anger and spotlight. Never mind that there are others in a similar if not exact same position whose political and social views are exactly the opposite of those held by these chosen liberal token victims. If you give the microphone to these victims why not give it to all such people, no matter what their political views are?
Conclusion
The next time you see an image of some ingrate holding an infant in front of himself during a battle, a crime, or any confrontation, allow yourself a moment of meditation amid the sheer evil of such actions.
During that moment, consider that the criminal, terrorist or soldier you are watching is an example of the lowest kind of coward and hypocrite. Consider that anyone who would manipulate another, especially the suffering of another, for personal gain and advantage is a despicable creature. Consider that it is the depth of hypocrisy to further victimize victims by turning them into political puppets and then express outrage at any criticisms or questions concerning what those victims do or say.
Finally, consider that people like Cindy Sheehan, Anne Coulter’s 9/11 wives, the Katrina victims and Michael Berg have been used as such political puppets by cunning liberals. Now you know why liberals often defend criminals, terrorists and guerilla warfare foes. Hey, I never said that liberals are not loyal or that they do not learn from their role models.
"Hate speech! Hate speech! I'm calling the ACLU on you!!"
/sarc off.
Spot on, Aussie.
Excellent article!
I hope we see more articles like this in the near future. Hopefully, Ann has started a ball rolling that will roll right over these libs and their despicable tactic.
bookmark
Sock puppets for the Left. Today, they were as thick as flies around here (where I am). Sheesh, will somebody pass the Raid?
If you've been proven wrong time and again by cold hard facts, all you can do is kill the opposition's messenger. This sort of prepositioned objection gives them a common refrain to utilize. The left, including those who have utilized the xenophobic-racist-sexist-elitist charges here in recent months, does it so smoothly because of practice. After all, since their ideas DO NOT WORK, the only tactic left to them is personal attacks on the speaker. Notice they're not here bitching about Ann, or the exposure this sort of bull$#!# is getting now, just hanging tight under their rocks.
Good point in this article.
This is Ann Coulter's Liberal Doctrine of Infallibility.
Credit where credit is due.
Ann, you're doing God's work.
And in my vulnerable quiet moments, I've thought in detail about doing you.
Outstanding observation!!
We need to come up with the appropriate, catchy label now...
Human ideologue shield? Doesn't quite do it.
We need a contest.
Whenever a tax cut is suggested, liberals parade out all the programs they say will be hurt by lack of funding (elderly health care benefits, head start programs, homeless shelters). They often use these economic shields to "protect" the tax money flowing to their pet liberal causes.
It's time we start calling them on it.
Beautifully written!
Consider that anyone who would manipulate another, especially the suffering of another, for personal gain and advantage is a despicable creature. Consider that it is the depth of hypocrisy to further victimize victims by turning them into political puppets and then express outrage at any criticisms or questions concerning what those victims do or say. Yes, the democrap party has made the final descent to wholy despicable. The hypocrisy they exhibit is pure deceit, pure manipulation with a dash of 'despise'; to manipulate people the way the despicable democrat party now does it shows how much they despise those they seek to manipulate. Conservatives (of all races) should have figured this out with the democrap party manipulation of black people: gave lip service to 'equality' and 'anti-racism' while promoting the most despicable means to eliminate black people, abortion of their unborn babies. And shills for satan like jesse jackasson ought now be called on it, big time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.