Ward Churchill splashes back onto the scene, via Jackson's Junction, and this time he is advocating a less that passive approach to conscientious objection.
"For those of you who do, as a matter of principle, oppose war in any form, the idea of supporting a conscientious objector who's already been inducted in his combat service in Iraq might have a certain appeal. But let me ask you this: Would you render the same level of support to someone who hadn't conscientiously objected, but rather instead rolled a grenade under their line officer in order to neutralize the combat capacity of their unit?"
"...Conscientious objection removes a given piece of cannon fodder from the fray. Fragging an officer has a much more impactful effect." - Ward Churchill, Portland, Oregon- 6/23/05
Churchill's latest comment only brings one question to mind: Would it be all right to “frag” his ass yet?
And to think, there was a time when calling Churchill anti-American was considered unsavory and a bit reactionary. Now it seems enlightened and a bit psychic even. I say send him to Gitmo for a vacation. He's earned it. And I don't want to hear about any A/C “torture” either. I'm just about ready for the real thing in this case.
No comments:
Post a Comment