Worthington's "The war on terror is not for sissies": A Rebuttal

July 31, 2005

Newest Comments at the Bottom

---

I take great umbrage with Peter Worthington’s poorly conceived belief that it's the right of the State to murder innocents to achieve victory against terrorism. For that is exactly what he said in his column posted on MILNEWS.

Apologists for the Right in this country have long been out of their head regarding what constitutes legal and morally justified tactics by authorities. And Worthington is now leading the charge. It’s time to silence their idiocy with common sense.

I would ask you this: wouldn't you have a problem with police in democratic and law abiding countries, like Canada, chasing down a young and frightened member of your family, apprehending him and, while he lay confused and terrorised, face down on cold concrete, killing him? While he was face down, with police swarming about him, literally knelling on his back, he is not quickly body frisked to see if he has a bomb vest? His backpack is not removed and he's not restrained while his circumstances are closely investigated, as is normally accepted? Do you think it's right, in this case, to force a gun to the back of his skull and fire 7 times, obliterating his skull, spreading his brain about the area?

I don’t want to hear about terror, fright or desperate last second decision making, because professional western Police forces have training. In the specific case in London, the Police in question were highly trained members of a counter terror unit, Scotland Yard’s best. You would think their advanced training and rigorous selection would never allow them to succumb to panic. You’d be correct, because these cops operated on specific orders that allowed them to execute Joao Menezes without the least effort to insure he was a terror bomber! This will be forthcoming in the investigation. Already, Scotland Yard has modified its rules of engagement and retooled its operating procedures. Heads would roll if this happened again. Heads would fall far from the axe if it happened to a white Brit!

But if Peter Worthington has his way, not only would more special teams be wandering London executing innocent people, but also his demands would insure that this would be happening in Canada! Worthington would like to see your families placed in dire jeopardy because in the world of Right Wing apologists, your rights are secondary to those of the State. Where have you heard that before? He thinks it's just to have sharpshooters blow a 5-inch hole in the back of your teen’s body because of confused circumstances. That is exactly what he advocates.

Worthington seems to be ignorant of the specific training regarding suicide bombers. In fact, the Brit Special Police basically followed the correct rules of engagement - until they committed murder. One cop or soldier, upon ascertaining a potential threat, will silently rush the subject person and brutally linebacker tackle him, in the hope that the shock will disorient him enough to allow control of the threat. Then the cop gives vocal warning to clear the area. The cop uses quick, effective blows to subdue him, followed by a search for an explosive vest and trigger. This method has been taught to troops in Afghanistan as the Israeli method of dealing with a subject who won't stop. This is the best method to stop and isolate a suspect while ensuring minimum casualties if indeed a bomber is found. Again, I will not tolerate Right Wing mumblings about panic. Cops should not be cops if they are not willing to place themselves in mortal danger to save others, agreed?

If we look to British history, we see there hasn’t been Worthington’s proscribed level of police power to murder since the time of their Civil War! The Brits managed to persevere over Germany’s bombing terror, and 40 years of IRA bombs, without executing its citizens in the streets. In fact, they have prosecuted these very excesses of force by Brit forces during the "Irish Troubles". In fact, there is direct precedent to renounce such barbarity by British security forces. I speak of the 1988 shootings by the SAS of three fleeing IRA suspects in Gibraltar (Ed. Note: Background on OP Flavius - More - more).

So why is it OK now? Perspective (which the Bard of the Toronto Sun has abandoned) would clearly indicate that this threat is no different. It is obvious that England will not fall into the sea, so why should its historic civil rights be tossed aside? Because the Right Wing condones it, and may indeed crave such fascist justice here in Canada? I think not!

I and others like me have sworn an oath to protect Canada from all threats, and I say to you that the greatest threat Canada faces today is from the likes of Peter Worthington. He would strip away your civil rights in the prosecution of the War On Terror, or whatever the Americans call it now. He demands we allow authorities to read our mail because our skin colour is too dark, or because of the religion we practice. He advocates detention without rights, and trials without justice (this is what he has said in previous columns).

Does Worthington think white people, or ‘good’ people need fear the loss of their rights? Perhaps Worthington doesn’t expect your son or daughter to be doing something that will get them killed by accident! But it will, if your rights are allowed to atrophy in the name of the 'Greater Good’.

If a nation values the many over the rights of just one of its citizens, terrorists have won. Thank you, Peter Worthington and others like you, for supporting the work of the terrorists. It was always their aim to sow discord and violence within our society, though a breakdown of what we cherish most, our freedom. It appears Worthington of late has made it his life’s work to facilitating that very disaster. There is very little reason for a nation to abandon its justice, and the War on Terror isn’t one of them. There is no terrorist enemy able to topple our government. Terror bombs are nothing new, especially to the English.

If there were better, more intelligent methods of police security, wouldn't you insist police use them before shooting innocent people in the head? If we couldn't train our police to a high enough standard, if we couldn't adopt proven ways of dealing with suicide bombers, we would truly be lost. This isn’t the case. After 4 years of warning, it's unacceptable that forces would not be trained to this level. Perhaps Worthington should be using his pulpit to demand this, instead of the legal murder of your family members.

And I would suggest that we watch those who would destroy our freedom, and hurl us into a Dark Age of repression in our own land. No, not the terror organisations, for they will never defeat us. I’m talking about the Worthingtons of the various Western national press, who would strip our freedoms away for the flimsiest of excuses, and because they can’t think of a better way.

Remember that when you picture a family member with no head, killed because he had a bulky coat on. One you bought him for Christmas.

 Create your own free wiki!Help Add to Del.ici.ous Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to fUrl Add to SpurlPublic, not yet premium Privacy Policy RSS