« Maher Arar needs your help | Main | Not dead, just resting »

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

Comments

No right of self defense:

I think that this principle is a very old one, dating at least as far back as the European conquest of the American continent. Outdated firearms were available to the native Americans but the latest thing in rifles were transferred to them only by 'renegades' in violation of law. Imagine what the situation might have been if the 'Indian' defenders (or 'savages' in Jefferson's formulation) had had the good stuff to fight back with as well as their intimate knowledge of terrain and ability to live off the land. The Euros might have had to resort to biological (smallpox) or chemical (fire water) warfare to make any headway. Oh, that's right! 'Full spectrum dominance' is also a ancient idea.....


Yeah, I'm sure it dates back to the great Olduvai sharpened-stick battle between the Og and Thag clans. Funny how it can nonetheless come as a revelation to otherwise intelligent people.

And do you know how many times it has been unacceptable to take "yes, we agree…" as an answer?

Something psychotic going on here, if not stark raving madness.

And it is not the Iranians.

If we think of US/Israel vs Iran as the macro application of this rule, the micro application is now applied everywhere as well: If you are attacked by a police officer - either in error or in malice - and attempt to defend yourself, the police officer can injure or kill you and society (represented by the courts and the media) will approve their actions. The very fact that they have attacked you from their position as wielder of power justifies their actions. There's a "Catch-22" syllogism in there somewhere, I'm just not bright enough to formulate it.

If you are innocent, you have no need of defense; if you defend yourself you are guilty. If you float, you are a witch; if you sink, you are not. That's some catch, that catch 22. Best there is.

The comments to this entry are closed.