This, however, is not forgivable. Clearly, he is cross, but he is also mistaken:
But if there is any truth to these suggestions - if it does turn out that politics has been played with our national security - impeachments alone won't be enough. This would be gross, irresponsible negligence of the highest order. A blase disregard of people's safety and lives resulting in the maiming and death of scores of innocents. And for what? Power, plain and simple. If this is true, our leaders will have become as bad as those they are supposed to be fighting.Various commenters have attempted to temper this suggestion, but Nosemonkey is unrepentant:
Consciously not preventing something terrible when you could have done is obviously not as bad as actually causing the thing in the first place, but as far as I'm concerned it's as near as damn it - especially when it's your JOB to get involved in such situations. It's like a policeman ignoring a burglar or a fireman ignoring a fire.I'm sorry, but this is unacceptable. I refute it thus:
Nosemonkey: you suggest that - if these allegations are true - Bush et al are as bad, as reprehensible, as condemned to burn in hell as the terrorists who planned and carried out their attack. Note that I do not stress especially the "if". I have no beef as to truth or otherwise of the allegation. I would have no problem with impeachment, or even jailing the tosspot if necessary.
My gripe is with your logic. Consider this: you suggest that they are as bad as each other. Turn this around and ask yourself if they are as good as each other. If the slate for the US presidential election in 2004 had Bush on the one side, and the terrorists on the other, whom would you wish to win? Perhaps you get a different answer now. That you cannot see this is very, very disturbing.
For evil to triumph all it takes is for good men to do nothing and all that.True, but evil will certainly triumph if we allow ourselves to succumb to the moral equivalence that can only serve to blur our view of the real enemy.