.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Thursday, March 09, 2006

Liberals Accept Responsibility for Killers - LARK

A libertarian lady wrote a lot of letters to the White House complaining about the treatment of a captive insurgent (terrorist) being held in Guantanamo Bay. She received back the following reply:

The White House - 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue - Washington, D.C.. 20016

Dear Concerned Citizen,

Thank you for your recent letter roundly criticizing our treatment ofthe Taliban and Al Qaeda detainees currently being held at GuantanamoBay, Cuba.

Our administration takes these matters seriously and your opinion was heard loud and clear here in Washington. You'll be pleased to learn that, thanks to the concerns of citizens like yourself, we are creating a new division of the Terrorist Retraining Program, to be called the"Liberals Accept Responsibility for Killers" program, or LARK for short.

In accordance with the guidelines of this new program, we have decided to place one terrorist under your personal care. Your personal detainee has been selected and scheduled for transportation under heavily armed guard to your residence next Monday. Ali Mohammed Ahmed bin Mahmud (you can just call him Ahmed) is to be cared for pursuant to the standards you personally demanded in your letter of complaint.

It will likely be necessary for you to hire some assistant caretakers. We will conduct weekly inspections to ensure that your standards of carefor Ahmed are commensurate with those you so strongly recommended inyour letter.

Although Ahmed is a sociopath and extremely violent, we hope that yours ensitivity to what you described as his "attitudinal problem" will help him overcome these character flaws. Perhaps you are correct in describing these problems as mere cultural differences. We understand that you plan to offer counseling and home schooling.

Your adopted terrorist is extremely proficient in hand-to-hand combat and can extinguish human life with such simple items as a pencil or nail clippers. We advise that you do not ask him to demonstrate these skills at your next yoga group. He is also expert at making a wide variety of explosive devices from common household products, so you may wish to keep those items locked up, unless (in your opinion) this might offen dhim.

Ahmed will not wish to interact with you or your daughters (except sexually), since he views females as a subhuman form of property. This is a particularly sensitive subject for him and he has been known to show violent tendencies around women who fail to comply with the new dress code that he will recommend as more appropriate attire. I'm surey ou will come to enjoy the anonymity offered by the burka -- over time. Just remember that it is all part of "respecting his culture and his religious beliefs" -- wasn't that how you put it?

Thanks again for your letter. We truly appreciate it when folks like you keep us informed of the proper way to do our job. You take good care of Ahmed - and remember...we'll be watching.

Good luck!


Comments:
Funny. We can implement this at the same time that we implement the CHAOSa program (Conservative Hacks Asphixiating On Stinky air), in which we only place polluting factories next door to conservatives, since they want to deregulate things.

Or how about the Congress First! rule, in which anyone who votes for a war has to be the first in line to go to the frontlines?
 
On oldy but a goody!!!
 
Hey Danny, the US is the most environmentally regualted country on the planet. This is fact. And you and I have gone round and round about this. What I still can't understand is that although we consume oil at levels even I think are too high, we police ourselves more than any other nation. And why is there little if any pressure on the cesspool polluters in the rest of the industrialized world like Poland, Russia, and China to clean themselves up?

Your last point about Congress and voting for a war is what I would expect since you have stated at least once on my site that there is no war that you would ever sanction. And if that is what you truly believe, then you feel that the US can not defend itself against any agressor or support our allies in doing the same. Is that accurate? Please advise.
 
I pressure the US to better itself for three related reasons:

1. It's where I live. Responsibility begins at home. I can't legislate personal responsibility for Poland or Russia, but I can expect our lawmakers to hold our citizenry responsible for their behavior.

2. As touched on above: Personal responsibility. It's just that I don't want your garbage in my backyard. We agree on the point when the garbage is solid but when it's gas or liquid we apparently disagree.

3. I forget the third, but it was surely a good one.

On your last question, I'm okay with any nation defending itself when attacked. What I'm saying though, is that Christians ought to be about the business of following Jesus' teachings. So, if we're attacked and you want to start firing at an invading soldier, fine. Who knows, if I thought it were truly an unprovoked invasion and that I could target only the enemy combatants, I might join you.

If, on the other hand, you want to start dropping bombs on another nation unprovoked and in the process you're going to be hitting a good number of civilians (estimated at 70% in Iraq by some studies), I will call such an invasion a crime against peace - a war crime - and try to get those responsible jailed.
 
Nice blog. I will keep reading. Please take the time to visit my blog about Free Guitar Lesson
 
Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home
|

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?