Kilts for Gitmo

For some utterly baffling reason, the reaction to the release of the lone Lockerbie assassin is woefully misguided. For Americans (other than the members of the affected families) the question should revolve around the issue of combating terrorism. The Denver Post, reported (January, 2009) that White House sources argue that the Denver Supermax prison is “tailor made” for Gitmo detainees: the tailoring is more likely to be a kilt.

 

And no one seems to make the glaring connections of the dots, leading from Lockerbie to Guantanamo. Supporters of releasing the Gitmo detainees argue there is not a whit of difference between terrorists from Iraq and Afghanistan and domestic detainees in, say, your local Wal-Mart of prisons, Super Max. Now add Scotland, and the UK’s ‘compassionate release’ of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmet al-Megrahi to the geographic equation.

 

No matter how broad the shadow cast by terrorism—and that is the essence of terror—there remains the lengthening dark cast on “compassionate releases.” The battle allegedly began on this issue, and this article will conclude at least on a brief note of this overshadowed issue. Imagine, with hundreds of terrorists jailed in America, subject to the same rules of ‘compassionate release,’ by any beneficent advocate, or kind hearted judge…or politicians who may have lost or gained power. For example, in May of 2009, defense lawyers in New York continued to attack federal compassionate release polices as “stifling” early release. Here are the guiding lights for compassionate release in federal prisons:

 

 

 

 

In the end, when applied to unregenerate terrorists, compassionate release may be an example of being ‘kilt by kindness.’ The release of al-Megrahi was nothing but giving aid and comfort to terror. Obviously, stones and bars do not alone a prison make…so does terror make a home.