Posted on 06/16/2005 3:25:40 PM PDT by flightleader
With all of the caterwauling over the U.S. prison facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, it seems necessary to visit the facts for just a moment. If you have ever read Alice in Wonderland, you are familiar with the following exchange between Alice and Humpty Dumpty concerning the obvious meaning of words:
Humpty Dumpty’s philosophy is the epitome of how Leftists argue this and all other issues. So maybe we should come to an accurate understanding of certain terms used and often misused, in this debate.“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master—that’s all.” —Louis Carrol, Alice in Wonderland.
Guantamamo Bay – This is not a prison facility. It is a U.S. Naval/Air station that has exited since February 1903 wherein a prison facility was erected in 2001 for the sole purpose of detaining and interrogating known terror suspects and Illegal Enemy Combatants. Leftists understand the distinction however their calls for the closure of “Guantanamo Bay” as opposed to the “prison facility” on the base, is a relic of Cold War socialist hostility towards U.S. power. Many Leftists have never been comfortable with the U.S. presence in Cuba and this feeling grew more strident in the wake of the 1959 communist revolution which ushered in the dictatorship of Fidel Castro. Leftists generally believe that the treaty(s) that originally gave the U.S. the right to reside in Guantanamo Bay, were, as a result of revolution, moot. In their view the base should have been vacated and returned to Cuba. The U.S. on the other hand has continued to pay the Cuban Government the agreed upon lease amount on an annual basis. There is no evidence that Castro’s government has ever cashed the checks.
Illegal Enemy Combatant – This is not an Enemy Prisoner of War. This is an individual captured while engaged in combat with U.S. forces who cannot be readily identified with the warring nation. Illegal Enemy Combatants do not fight while wearing uniforms or openly carrying weapons. Additionally their targets include both military personnel as well as known civilian non-combatants. They masquerade as civilians for strategic purposes; conducting war by subterfuge. For this reason they are not covered under the Geneva Conventions respecting the treatment of “Prisoners of War.” Leftists seek to have these individuals classified as Prisoners of War based in part on a flawed use of Article 4, Section 2 which states that Prisoners of War includes “members of militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this territory is occupied…” What they fail to accept is that Section 2 goes on to state that such persons must be a) commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates, b) have a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance, c) carry arms openly, and d) conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. Absent their meeting these criteria, the only legitimate classification for said persons is that of Illegal Enemy Combatants. While the U.S. does not torture persons held under its authority, the primary reason for making this distinction is to combat the belief that such persons must be afforded the jurisprudential protections applicable to Prisoners of War which includes, but is not limited to, the privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus (See Geneva Conventions, Article 3, Section 1(d)).
Torture – There is considerable reluctance on the part of the Left to define this word. The problem with applying a definition is that the definition limits the duplicitous, Humpty Dumpty manner in which they choose to argue. A word that means nothing ultimately means everything. In brief, “torture”, is the intentional infliction of great physical pain and/or extraordinary mental distress. I will presume that anyone reading this is of at least average intelligence therefore I will not condescend to define “great physical pain and/or extraordinary mental distress.” The Left however believes or perhaps pretends to believe that “torture” includes anything that a detainee finds unpleasant. Needless to say, this deliberate use of ambiguity is convenient for anyone wishing to make a political statement. Unfortunately it also aids and abets this country’s enemies in the process by creating the impression that the U.S. is exactly the same as its enemies yesterday and today. Note that members of Al Queda (among others) have been instructed to make false accusations of torture against their captors. Although any and all such accusations must be thoroughly investigated, it is appalling that the Left elects to uncritically accept them as unequivocal truth.
It appears that the Left’s abhorrence of definitions impedes their ability to understand that there is a difference between a question and an accusation. They level accusations against the U.S. government and when met with criticism they retreat into the fortress of victimhood while asking, “Do we not have the right to question our government?” Accusing another of a wrong is not a question. One’s opponent need not answer. For when an accusation is made the burden of proof rests with the accuser to prove it, not the accused to disprove it. Yet with every passing day this administration is asked to disprove accusations of “torture” which are all too often the fanciful elevation of any inconvenience to the level of horrors suffered visited upon the prisoners at Auschwitz.
While I would like to believe that Leftists have America’s best interests at heart, that their sole purpose for accusing the U.S. government of crimes against humanity and comparing the U.S. government to the Soviets, Nazi’s and Pol Pot is to force a policy shift in the interests of improving America’s image around the world, reason, logic, facts and evidence leads me to another, rather disheartening conclusion. When considering the totality of their baseless accusations, virulent protestations and feigned outrages, one can only conclude that their views on this matter are shaped by their hatred of the current administration. It seems rather obvious that their desire to harm the Bush administration is more important that their desire to seek the truth. Many Leftists understand that the consequences of their actions include increasing the danger faced by U.S. forces and fomenting the hateful passions of America’s enemies the world over yet it does not seem to matter. George Bush, his administrations and to a lesser degree America, is the enemy and in that respect the Left’s behaviour is right out of the Sun Tzu/Machiavellian playbook, “Whatever weakens your enemy strengthens you.”
The Humpty Dumpty analogy is right on. Let's hope that it fulfills itself in that these Leftists fall off the wall and break into pieces that no one can put together again.
Mark to read later.
Leftists always manage to take the position that most undermines American security.
bttt
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.