As for Ayers himself, if he killed then my earlier opinion of terrorists applies: he deserves to rot and die, preferably painfully.
Because of what sounds like an almighty ****up on the case, that didn't happen (a good few cases against the IRA have failed for the same reason, the legality of the methods used to gather info, although so extensive a degree). I'm surprised no other charges could be laid. But that's done.
Now we - and Obama - have to deal with the situation as it stands, where this former radical killer is accepted free in society and has a responsible role. We didn't grant him that role, others did. Society did. It happens - it had already happened well before Obama was on the scene, and when he was clearly in no position of power to stop it.
Just like Gerry Adams, just like Yitzhak Shamir, etc etc. Former terrorists do get accepted into politics and civic society, whether or not they ever served any punishment for their crimes. And other politicians have to deal with that.
But never mind the former terrorists, accepted before the pols come on the scene or elected by voters with stronger stomachs so they have democratic acceptability. IMO if you want to obsess over accepting terrorists, it's deals with still-active terrorists that are most reprehensible: surely you'd accept that what is most vile is to deal with people still outside civilised society, who are still murdering and bombing, raising funds through drugs, robbery, extortion and the like.
Would you agree that's much worse? That's the real evil?
And you'd surely agree that no righteous person could accept and honour such terrorists, still less aid them? |
