According to this AP article,
George Galloway, a British politician and noted wacko, was quoted as
saying it would be “morally justified” to assassinate Tony Blair.
Galloway
argues “It would be entirely logical and explicable ? and morally
equivalent to ordering the deaths of thousands of innocent people in
Iraq as Blair did.”
But, according to Galloway, we shouldn’t
believe that he advocates killing Blair: “But I’ve made my position
clear. I would not support anyone seeking to assassinate the prime
minister,” he said.
Good to know his position on assassinating
Blair. He thinks it would be fine to kill him. He just doesn’t
advocate that anyone kill him.
This type of speech likely is
protected even here in the U.S (and I think it should be).
However, if you contribute too much money to a campaign or run issue
advocacy ads right before an election, in other words, engage in
political speech, you could be breaking the law. Justify the
killing of politicians, well that’s o.k., but don’t you dare spend
money on trying to educate the public on issues!
Is it me, or is there something wrong with this picture?
