|
Allow me to make an observation about the liberal/leftwing reaction to the attacks....
The left loves to lecture about the laws of 'unintended consquences', for example, the violent situation in Iraq would, by their way of thinking, be an unintended consequence of the decision to invade. Fair enough.
But for some reason they believe themselves to be above the selfsame laws.
Answer me this question.
What is the unintended consequence of :
Painting your very own government as Nazis ?
Portraying your own Commander In Chief as a primate and a zealot ?
Attacking your own country at every turn.
Trying to 'understand' the terrorists?
Mirroring terrorists opinions in all but their actions.
The intended consequence may be to turn up the level of vigilance on government activity, and quite rightly so.
But what of the unintended consequence ?
Terrorists winning the media war.
Aid and comfort to the enemy.
Fueling the fires of anti-americanism and hatred.
Showing the madmen that we care more about their freedoms than they do about ours.
Providing an intellectual safe-haven for radical-ideas on the basis of 'understanding the threat'
In if perhaps one of these unintended consequences were to allow a massive attack to take place, would they take any responsibility ?
Or are liberals immune to such laws ?
Well, I think we know the answer.
Remember when Abu Ghraib broke ? What did the liberals say ?
That Don Rumsfeld had 'created a climate' where abuse could take place.
Seems like they fail to recognize their own ability to 'create a climate' where terrorists can rely on public support for their viewpoints, if not their actions
(and, quite frankly there's plenty of support for their actions too)
Overall I'd just like liberals to be aware that taking the 'right path' (in thier view) does not mean they have no responsibilty towards their nation and the safety of their society.
Their actions, no matter how noble in ideal, also have consequences.
Something , from what I've seen, that they almost never concern themselves with.
|