I, for one, was very struck by the Justice Minister's interview on CNN. He spoke very eloquently and truthfully, a type of honest eloquence that we rarely if ever see displayed by politicians in our country.
And Wolf Blitzer, who I generally like, asked irrelevant, baiting questions, such as "What if it had been your child on that plane?" and "How do you feel that your name will now forever be linked to the release of a mass murderer?"
Both of those questions did not pertain to his position, nor should they be relevant in the matter. They were knee-jerk, go-for-the-emotional-manipulation, look-at-it-from-one-angle questions that have become so much a part of our national discourse on so many issues. ("How would you feel if it was YOUR grandmother up against a death panel?")
But the Justice Minister did not get angry and still stated his case well. His case, for those who haven't seen him speak, is that the Scottish justice system is based on justice, but also on compassion. Just because this man did not show any sense of compassion, Scotland should not stoop to his level. We are better than that, for compassion is given to those who show none. In many ways, the argument resembles certain elements of the torture debate. "They didn't show restraint and decency when THEY torture, so we should torture them! Tit-for-tat!" Which, of course, goes against what many consider to be the essence of our country.
When it comes right down to it, doing what is right isn't what is easy the majority of the time.
The way people talk about this Justice Minister, including some in this thread, you would think that the act of showing compassion is equal to the atrocity committed by the bomber. Which is the equivalent of comparing Obamacare to the Nazis. It's the same base-level reactionary discourse that is destroying any sort of real debate about ANY issue in this country.
Attack the person and attack the character of the person and attack the ideas of a person so hyperbolically that it becomes impossible to have any sort of effective and potentially enlightening debate.
I am not saying that everyone has to believe it was the correct thing to do to release him. I do not even know if I think so myself. (However, is the idea of a justice system based on justice AND compassion that ridiculous? If we lose our ability to show compassion, even to the most monstrous humans, don't we allow them to take some of our own humanity?)
But do not assassinate the character of a person doing their job and making a very tough decision he believed to the correct one. Disagree with him, debate his ideas.
But saying things like "I don't know how that guy sleeps at night. (the judge, OR the bomber)" is the very sort of thing DESTROYING any sort effective and progressive discourse in this country. And it takes a Justice Minister from another nation to show this, as we certainly have slim-pickings of politicians over here interested in civil discourse of ideas.
"One no longer loves one's insight enough once one communicates it."
The opposite of creation isn't war, it's stagnation.
.jpg?format=auto&width=365)
