A link on Facebook led me to
this article. I just finished the thing. I'm stunned.
I don't disagree with the concept of 'diversity' being overused, being cliche, or being outdated. That's like saying "Fairness? That's so yesterday", or "due-process? that's so last century..."
Her assumption that diversity as a negative in the US Military is, generally, wrong.
Her commentary is divisive: describing a suburb of L.A. as a third-world country? Well, Ms. Coulter, how about Detroit? or New Orleans? or Harlem? There's a lot of black people living in rundown neighborhoods in those places; are they 'third-worlds', too.
Her quote of General George Casey is incomplete, and out of context:
In an interview with George Stephanopoulos on ABC's program "This Week", the question was raised that, while there is a definite need for muslims in the military right now, perhaps some examination of those muslims who volunteer to serve might be in order, based on recent events....
GS: "...this is not the first case we've seen of fratricide by someone with a Muslim background in the military. How do you deal with this challenge?"
Gen Casey: "I think that is something you need to be very careful about, and I think that speculation could potentially heighten backlash against some of our muslim soldiers; and what happened at Ft. Hood was a tragedy, but I believe that it would be an even greater tragedy if our diversity becomes a casualty here, and it's not just about Muslims; we have a very diverse Army, we have a very diverse society; and that gives us all strength; so we need to be very careful about that."
General Casey goes on to talk about the need to re-examine Army policies on the mental health of the force, and to look at ways to work with members of the military to deal with mental illness, shellshock (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder for all you liberals out there), and other conditions suffered by some of the military.
As an independent thinker, I concur with Gen. Casey. I agree with his comments. His love for those he commands is evident, and I support whatever actions he sees fit to take.
- - -
The heart of her article, Ms. Coulter denounces the choice of a civilian trial for an individual who planned an act of mass murder.
I agree. Stunned?
However, I believe that a war crimes court - preferably one outside of this country, governed by international law, overseen by a multi-national judge and jury - to be more appropriate, not a military trial where silence, secrecy and closed doors are de rigor.
Ms. Coulter berates the fact that a civilian trial would grant the defendant the right to representation, the right to face your accuser, the right to examine the evidence against you, and several other Constitutional rights that we US Citizens enjoy, and take for granted. Many of these rights would also be granted in a war-crimes tribunal.
The accused should and, in my opinion, MUST be granted these rights. Without an open, deliberate process, without those rights and processes, the entire thing devolves into a show-trial, a drumhead, a presentation on MSNBC brought to you by Cheverolet and Tampax, and the outcome will forever be suspect, regardless of the strength of the evidence presented.
The only objection to allowing this process, and granting those rights, are people who believe that the case against the individual would not hold up to public scrutiny.
(A related note: the lunacy of assuming New York to be a fair venue for that trial should be self-evident to anyone with half a brain. What was Obama thinking?)
In the end: Ms. Coulter's article demonstrates a journalistic simplicity, colored by a divisive political and social philosophy. Ms Coulter has shown us, through her article, an underlying negativism (at best) of muslims, particularly those who live in this country, and require her to judge people based on their individual merits, instead of their ethnic heritage -- which is the underlying through behind the celebration of 'diversity' espoused by that hated faction of our nation, those, those, 'liberals'
Finally: The fact that Ms. Coulter's vitriol is published in the "Jewish World Review" is appalling. The fact that they printed it is telling of that particular organization. I pray to God that her opinion, or their decision to publish it, is not representative of the broader Jewish community in this country. If it is, then the promise of Lady Liberty, indeed the promise of all of America has "jumped the shark", and the true message of Ms. Coulter's much berated 'liberals', those insane Americans who continue to extol the virtues of diversity, is needed now, more than ever.