A Tangled Web

The Friday Essay



GOOD TERRORIST, BAD TERRORIST?



Would it be reasonable to expect that former Taliban leader Mullar Omar be given an important portfolio, say Defence, in the recently reconstructed Afghanistan Government? No? Ok, how about the proposal that the new Iraqi Government must contain Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the man who boasts of decapitating innocent Americans Nick Berg and Paul Johnson? No?



These proposals are obviously unthinkable as they would represent a reward to barbarian terrorists and a moral capitulation to the will of wicked men. So why is it that on his weekend visit to Ireland President Bush has gone on record saying that the Northern Ireland “peace process” can be a model to help solve other conflicts around the world when it similarly elevated evil men to positions of high office?? Has Irish blarney got the better of the President’s better judgement?



Speaking at Dromoland Castle in County Clare, President Bush speculated that “When this conflict is resolved, it will be an example for others that long simmering disputes can be put behind them and free and peaceful societies can emerge for the interest of the people who have been involved in the dispute."



This wonderful model of “conflict resolution” requires a little elucidation so readers can assess for themselves precisely what is being advocated.



For example, is truthfulness necessary for political progress?



Well, apparently not. During the early 1990’s the UK and Irish Governments conducted secret talks with Irish terrorist leaders as innocent people were being slaughtered on the streets in Belfast, London and many other places by the terrorist group, the IRA. Government denials of such talks provided a base of political deceit from which then US President Bill Clinton built by ignoring the advice of his security experts and issuing invites to the White House to Sinn Fein leaders Gerry Adams and Martin McGuiness.



Both men are believed by the UK and Irish Governments to also occupy senior positions within the IRA; this organisation has murdered thousands of people, both Protestant and Catholic. It has planted bombs in Church graveyards, it has detonated bombs at Hotels and in restaurants, it even forced people into becoming human bombs. For an organisation like this to be permitted into the White House demonstrated the staggering lack of morality that characterised the Clinton White House.



Imagine now how you would feel if the Bush White House sent a polite invite to Osama Bin Laden and a few of his key henchmen requesting their attendance at “peace talks” aimed at bringing the Jihadist conflict to an end? How would those who lost loved ones on 9/11 react? Would it seen as a courageous act of strong statesmanship or a craven betrayal of everything that the USA stands for?



Having conducted their talks in secret, a simple deal was arrived at between Irish terrorists and the UK Government. The terrorists magnanimously agreed not to kill any more members of the Security forces or bomb any more UK cities and towns on the clear understanding that their political objectives would be met. This required the release of all their convicted killers (including mass murderers) the acceptance that terrorists could police “their” own areas with impunity from the State forces and the phased dismantling of the State’s own security forces. Vitally, it also meant that the terrorist’s propagandists would be allowed to exercise political power in Government. They gained control of the Ministries of Health and Education. George Orwell would have appreciated the irony.



One more thing; all the time this appeasement was happening, the terrorists could main and murder, intimidate and extort, recruit and re-arm, and a blind eye from officialdom would be turned. When the IRA brutally murdered a young Roman Catholic in 2001, a British Government official simply referred to it as “internal housekeeping.” Get the picture?



Is this the perfect model that President Bush wants to export across the globe?

The Bible warns us, in Jeremiah 8:11, to beware those who cry "...Peace, peace; when there is no peace." There can no peace with terrorists. George W. Bush understood this back in 2001 when he made it clear that the United States was determined to bring terrorists to justice, or better still, justice to them.



Since then, political equivocation and moral inconsistency have plagued the Bush doctrine. Israel has been condemned by the US State Dept. for killing terrorist leaders such as psycho Sheikh Yassin. Ireland has been praised by the US State Dept. for working assiduously to place unreconstructed terrorists into the Government of Northern Ireland.

Three years on, those advising President Bush have chosen the most malignant model imaginable for dealing with terrorism worldwide by suggesting that Northern Ireland represents an authentic blueprint for progress. This is only possible if we accept that there are good and bad terrorists. To the victims of terrorism, such a distinction is repugnant.