Guantanamo Winter It all depends on what your meaning of barbarism is.

Now that the fighting in Afghanistan is largely over, the sophisticated have emerged, blinking into the new sunlight to explain — again — why America is bad. As is usually the case with such storms, the America-bashing wind blows in from the East, picking up speed in Western Europe before it reaches our shores. But, not surprisingly, there are plenty of people watching Europe and nodding their heads like Weather Channel addicts.

I had to read about them while I was writing about this absurd controversy over our treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo yesterday. I don't want to spoil that column for you, but I've got to mention that in Britain, and throughout Western Europe we're being accused of "torturing" these poor fellows. "These prisoners are trapped in open cages, manacled hand and foot, brutalised, tortured and humiliated," reads one typical British editorial.

Apparently, after living at several thousand feet in the wintry peaks of Tora Bora, it's "torture" and "barbaric" for us to store these murderers and thugs in the same Cuban climate millions of pasty white Canadians and Germans flock to every winter in order to enjoy the workers paradise.

Activists and Muslim spokesmen denounce the forced shaving of these murderers, in the words of former attorney general Ramsey Clark, as "a gross violation" of their "sensitivity and their religious beliefs." Recall, that these guys are the same people who arrested practicing (American) Christians and shot, stoned, crushed, folded, spindled, and mutilated all sorts of people for deviating from even the smallest religious orthodoxy.

Moreover, all of these guys, we were told, aren't really Muslims. Time and again, enough Muslim clerics here and abroad to form a crowd scene in Lawrence of Arabia, explained to us that "Islam means peace." They said these jerks from al Qaeda are nothing more than criminals and terrorists flagrantly violating Muslim law. So why, you might ask, are we treating their "religious beliefs" as so sacred?

Dr. Sayed Aziz Pasha, of the Union of Muslim Organizations, wrote recently in a British paper that shaving their beards "is not the action of a civilized country." I am deeply curious about what Pasha has to say about Muslim countries which remove beards of Christians the old-fashioned way — by taking off the whole head. (Okay, now I'm really stealing from my other column.)

I wonder what Dr. Pasha thinks of Safiyatu Huseini a Nigerian woman, profiled in the British Daily Mail. According to the Muslim laws of Sokoto, the northernmost state in Nigeria, she must be executed for adultery. That she claims she was raped by her cousin, is irrelevant to the Sharia law committee which enforces the Koran literally. But, hey, these aren't uncivilized people. The baby girl she gave birth to 11 months ago as a result of the rape is being permitted to suckle from her condemned mother for one year before she has to surrender herself to the "morality police." At which time the law committee will arrange an execution of Huseini by public stoning. Of course, Sharia law forbids the stone-throwers to aim for her head, so the execution will probably take a long time, at the very least an hour according to the Mirror. But, hey, that's a small price to pay for civilization.

Now, it may be unfair to hold the people complaining about our treatment of these terrorists accountable for the stoning of some woman in Nigeria. But, it's worth noting that across the globe, the Koran is a ubiquitous justification for cruelty, repression, and torture. And yet, as sure as a thud follows every Saudi beheading, I will hear from some Islamic activist about this column, charging me with bigotry against the Islamic world for pointing out this obvious fact. I will also hear from any number of liberals perfectly willing to say Bob Jones University is evil, but would be horrified at the idea of saying the same thing about some madrassa in Pakistan.

I don't mind the U.S. being held up to a higher standard than other countries — we're better (that's right, better) than most other nations and have a responsibility to lead. But, those who criticize the U.S. for not living up to their (always unattainable) expectations must be expected to have a similar standard for other cultures as well. If they don't, I really don't care what they have to say about the United States.

So I salute Dr. Pasha and others for calling the U.S. uncivilized — if they're also willing to say much worse about Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Sudan, Iran, the Sokoto province of Nigeria, and numerous other places. But, if such people think criticizing those nations is just so much bigotry, then they are opportunists or fools or both.

But, considering that Dr. Pasha warns that Muslims around the world might feel justified in exacting their rightful "revenge" on the U.S. because of our "uncivilized" cruelty in Guantanamo, I'm not holding my breath.

This infuriating pattern — of calling Americans cruel, repressive, arrogant, racist, etc., for pointing out the cruelty, racism, repression, and arrogance of others — goes to the heart of the Mobius-strip logic of multiculturalism today; all bad things must eventually wend their way back to America. Radical chic and boutique third worldism is so pervasive it's considered "intolerant" to point out the heinous intolerance of other societies.

Frankly, I have no more patience for it. This is a war on terrorism. It just so happens that the terrorists aren't extremist Anglicans, fundamentalist Buddhists, militant Mormons, or a radical faction of Up With People. They're Muslims. Poor Muslims and rich Muslims. Educated Muslims and uneducated Muslims.

Again, there is no philosophy to "terrorism." That's just a word for killing civilians to achieve political aims. The political aims in question stem directly from radical Islam. Of course, most Muslims are not terrorists, but most if not all of the terrorists we need to worry about are Muslims. This means Muslims are going to be disproportionately on the receiving end of our freshly opened cans of global whup-ass.

If our subsequent treatment of these terrorists infuriates other Muslims, they need to either get over it or stop telling us that the Osama bin Laden doesn't represent Islam.

If the majority of Muslims of goodwill and the legions of patronizing multiculturalists are embarrassed by the fact that our adversaries are Muslim, I can sympathize. Truly. But my sympathy runs out at precisely the same moment they exhaust their honesty.

Osama's quoted as saying something like, "when a woman sees a weak horse next to a strong horse, she always chooses the strong horse"?

Question of the day:

If you wanted to get a few pictures of al Qiada's terrorists out to all young men in radical Muslim nations and past the anti-US censors that showed them alone, shaved, bond, gagged, ears plugged (alone), head bowed and on their knees, pants pulled half way down their butts and a blond babe standing guard over them in kind of a dominatrix pose, how would you do it?

Anyone really think those humiliating photos were a coincidence or this controversy wasn't expected?

Western Europe we're being accused of "torturing" these poor fellows. "These prisoners are trapped in open cages, manacled hand and foot, brutalised, tortured and humiliated," reads one typical British editorial.

Well, would it be more humane to crush them in a 128 story burning building? After all, it would be fair treatment.

Activists and Muslim (Actually one and the same) spokesmen denounce the forced shaving of these murderers,

They had to shave them. They had head lice for crying out loud! Get a grip!

It just so happens that the terrorists aren't extremist Anglicans, fundamentalist Buddhists, militant Mormons, or a radical faction of Up With People.

I don't know...Those "Up With People" folks were always too suspiciously 'perky' for me! LOL.

What a great column. I, along with the author, am sick and tired of all the hand-wringing about our treatment of the prisoners. In my opinion, they are being treated with much more care than they deserve, and better than they ever would have treated their OWN prisoners.

"These prisoners are trapped in open cages, manacled hand and foot, brutalised, tortured and humiliated," reads one typical British editorial.

Aren't these the same guys that killed 8 Newsies and skinned 2 of them? None of the reporters killed must have been Brits. Loved the article & not enough people (press) saying these things.*sigh* No, I don't really expect the press to exhibit logic or common sense.

"Moreover, all of these guys, we were told, aren't really Muslims. Time and again, enough Muslim clerics here and abroad to form a crowd scene in Lawrence of Arabia, explained to us that "Islam means peace." They said these jerks from al Qaeda are nothing more than criminals and terrorists flagrantly violating Muslim law. So why, you might ask, are we treating their "religious beliefs" as so sacred?"

I love hearing these guys trip over their own words and ideologies.

"When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, naturally they will like the strong horse." -Osama

I think that the release of those pics and the info about shaving them was very deliberate. The thought of being humiliated like this is quite frightening to the Islamic mind. Being associated with someone who's been humiliated like this brings dishonor; kinda like being identified as part owner of a weak horse. By doing this, we cause people to turn away from Al Qaeda for fear of being seen to be as weak as these men. On 9/12, they saw Al Qaeda as the "strong horse" and wanted to be seen supporting them. By 1/12, Al Qaeda had become the "weak horse".

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.