Of Pirates, Terrorists, and Distractions

Just to be clear .... Its OK to call a Pirate a Pirate but not OK to call a Terrorist a Terrorist. They're doing pretty much the same damn thing as what less is piracy than terrorism on the high seas.

Nope ... Terrorism is now known as Man Caused Disasters or Un-Islamic Activity ( BTW ... Muslims in the middle east are severely beaten or killed for what sharia law considers un-islamic activity.)

Lets look at history on the subject

via AosHQ

We need to return to an important distinction first made by the Romans and subsequently incorporated into international law by way of medieval and early modern European jurisprudence, e.g. Grotius and Vattel. The Romans distinguished between bellum, war against legitimus hostis, a legitimate enemy, and guerra, war against latrunculi — pirates, robbers, brigands, and outlaws — "the common enemies of mankind."

The former, bellum, became the standard for interstate conflict, and it is here that the Geneva Conventions and other legal protections were meant to apply. They do not apply to the latter, guerra — indeed, punishment for latrunculi traditionally has been summary execution. Until recently, no international code has extended legal protection to pirates.

So ... "Until recently, no international code has extended legal protection to pirates" Why? ... Because they were feking Pirates! Tom Owens over at the National review indicates we've done the same thing now with al-queda and other terrorist organizations.

"Man Caused Disaterers" or "Un-Islamic Activators" are somehow entitled to these same extended legal protections provided in the Geneva Conventions or other civilian authorities.

No! They're feking Sand Pirates. Common enemies of Mankind, no better than any other band of Robbers, Brigands or Outlaws.

The distraction is trying to pursuade the public that there is a difference.