Its a day for pondering extremes.
On the day that Cindy Sheehan and others have been arrested in Washington.
Sheehan, whose 24-year-old son Casey was killed last year, and several dozen other protesters staged a sit-in on the sidewalk on Pennsylvania Avenue after marching along the pedestrian walkway, the Associated Press reported. Police warned them three times that they had to move along before making arrests, the news agency said.
...
Sheehan and some 200 other protesters sat in circles on the sidewalk, apparently courting arrest. Hundreds more people rallied in Lafayette Park, across Pennsylvania Avenue.
(Shakespeare's Sister has more)
While almost simultaneaously the Heretik blog informed us that four other peace protestors, the so-called St. Patrick's Four, have been aquited of the most serious charge levelled against them.
WHAT WE HAVE HERE is best said by attorney Bill Quigley:speaking for Clare Grady:
This is a simple case of government overkill; this is a simple case of the abuse of government power; this is a simple case of the government trying to take a simple case of non-violent protest and make a "federal case" out of it.
The government is calling these four people arrogant and unlawful and dangerous.
These four people could have stayed home and watched shock and awe on tv. They could have said this is somebody else's problem. They had jobs and kids and school and church -- just like the rest of us -- but they were peacemakers.
So why do I mention I am pondering extremes?
Because the President of Pakistan, one of the Bush allies in the "War on Terror", admitted the other day that he has no interest in catching Osama binLaden and isn't even bothering to look for him in the most likely area for him to be!
Asked if Bin Laden would ever be caught, President Musharraf told Time he hoped so.
But he added: "One would prefer that he's captured somewhere outside Pakistan. By some other people."
As to the whereabouts of the world's most wanted man - "We don't know anything at the moment," President Musharraf said.
"The reality is that about a year ago, we had some identification of a rough area where he was, through technical means, but then we lost him. That is how intelligence works."
He said he thought the "safest" place for Bin Laden to hide was on the border with Afghanistan.
"This line we are not including in each other's areas, so therefore you can easily switch sides."
One has to wonder, who is the enemy of freedom here, the peace protestor at the sit-in or the repressive dictator who is openly protecting the world's greatest criminal horror? I mean, come on George!
Is there a single issue, a single point of interest to the American people and the World, where the Bush administration is not terminally screwed up?
No comments:
Post a Comment