We can only hope the government will deal with California Talibanist John Walker as harshly as it did with Elian Gonzalez. Posted on 12/12/2001 1:57:33 PM PST by Pokey78
We can only hope the government will deal with California Talibanist John Walker as harshly as it did with Elian Gonzalez.
Encouraged by his indulgent liberal boomer parents to find his own spiritual path, Walker responded predictably – and quickly became a walking left-wing cliché. The one spiritual path it is absolutely positively certain Walker could never have chosen is one founded in Scripture.
In his hometown of Fairfax, Calif., the conventional spiritual paths include Taoism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Islam, Sufism, Rastafarianism, Native American spirituality and voodoo. But according to the Boston Globe, "only 12 percent of residents attend traditional churches or synagogues."
Walker's mother left Christianity to become a Buddhist. At his "alternative" school, Walker was steeped in Native American spirituality. He was named after John Lennon. If there were a goofy cult that prescribed eating your own excrement, liberals would ponder its deeper meaning and treat it with respect. The only thing John Walker could have done to shock the neighbors would have been to take off and follow Bob Jones.
Alas, Walker was no nonconformist. It was "The Autobiography of Malcolm X" that shook him to the core at age 16, persuading him to become a Muslim.
Has anyone read "The Autobiography of Malcolm X"? Here's a passage in which Mr. X describes his own education in Islam, as taught by his brother Reginald, whose "approach was so effective":
"The white man is the devil."
He told me that all whites knew they were devils -- "especially Masons."
I said, "Without any exception?"
"Without any exception."
"What about Hymie?"
"What is it if I let you make 500 dollars to let me make 10,000?"
After Reginald left, I thought. I thought. Thought.
Yes, that is something to think about. (I always knew there was something funny about those Masons.) This was the turning point in Walker's spiritual journey.
He became a Muslim and ended up fighting with the Taliban against America. (Maybe this conflict does have something to do with Islam.) While studying at an Islamic school in Pakistan, he said he met "many people connected with the Taliban" and his "heart became attached to that." The Taliban may execute people for sport, blow up thousand-year-old Buddhist statues, treat women like goats (and vice versa) -- but at least they aren't sneaky Luciferian Masons!
With the deep grounding he found in Islam, Walker couldn't even settle on a name for himself. He called himself variously "Sulayman Al-Lindh," "Sulayman Faris" and – his nom de jihad – "Abdul Hamid." (So it's not quite accurate to say – as various news outlets do – that he "goes by his mother's last name." He goes by a lot of names, none of them "Walker.")
Now there's the question of what to do with this perfect fruition of phony left-wing non-judgmentalism.
Since the government that stole Abdul's heart is not a signatory to the Geneva Convention, he could be shot. But the government he was fighting against is too nice to do that. America abides by the Geneva Convention even in conflicts with belligerents who do not. (It comes with the territory of being the Great Satan.) Consequently, if Abdul is treated simply as a POW, he is entitled to be repatriated when the war is over.
He could also be tried for treason. As defined in the Constitution, treason consists of "levying war against" the United States, "adhering" to America's enemies or giving them "aid and comfort." Taking up arms against the United States on the side of the Taliban is, as the movie title says, "as good as it gets."
Though the Constitution requires only "two witnesses to the same overt act" for a treason conviction, thanks to the miracle of television, there are millions of witnesses to Abdul's treason.
Indeed, it appears that Abdul's only defense to treason – apart from the Ezra Pound insanity defense – is to claim that he has already renounced his U.S. citizenship. He has certainly committed one of the predicate acts for a loss of citizenship under federal law by "entering, or serving in, the armed forces of a foreign state ... engaged in hostilities against the United States." The law also requires him to prove, however, that he did so "with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality." There is scant evidence for that.
The only downside to a trial in the United States is that it would be a trial in the United States. It's interesting that wide swaths of the public instantly warm to the idea of any proceeding for suspected terrorists and traitors – other than a criminal trial. All you have to do is invoke the name "O.J."
A win-win solution might be to turn Abdul over to the justice system of the natives. Abdul was a prisoner during the uprising in which CIA agent Michael Spann was killed. Having laid down their arms, the mutinous prisoners are not protected under the Geneva Convention. If Abdul participated in the uprising, he may have violated Afghan criminal law.
The new Afghan government is likely not to be so punctilious about evidence and procedure as the Great Satan is. But at least Abdul could rest assured that there would be absolutely no Masons on the jury.
There is no first case, and all left-wingers fit the second. There is no need to distinguish between an impossiblitiy and a universal truth. Her usage is correct, as are my examples in post 21, which apply directly to you.
Ann is a very bright and articulate woman. Why is she wasting her coulmn this week by bashing such an easy target? Seems like she picked this only because she is trying to rehabilitate herself (whether or not this is even necessary is another question onto itself) from the recent controversies surrounding her column.
One other minor point - I wonder if some may find it hard to take her comments about reading scripture seriously when the adjacent picture of her is so provocative. ....though, this photo may have been added by the you (if so, thanks!). I personally like the photo, being a red-blooded male with a taste for petite long blonde haired women in slinky attire.
Don't start something you can't finish.
Kinda dulls the sparkle of being a libertarian, doesn't it?
Why would I want to "back up" when I won the argument? You've twice mentioned your wish to say, "big deal." So concede, already, and go away.
The govt send Elian home to his father. You want
to send Walker back to Marin? Have a meal, Annie.
Preferably some brain food.
My entire point here is that her usage is fine, your correction specious, and you should give up now.
You can move on to your next chapter in Elements of Style now.
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.