PENTAGON: WIFE-GRABBING OK

Islamic Traditions, Founding Fathers Support Wife Seizures

(Washington) Increasingly, Pentagon officials find themselves defending themselves from treasonous journalistic revelations when most Americans would prefer that they concentrate their efforts on completing the mission in Iraq, and eventually, moving onto Iran. However, in the most recent irresponsible accusation made by the liberal mainstream media, Defense Department patriots once again find themselves explaining a perfectly legal tactic in the War on Terror©. “The grabbing of another man’s wife, as long as he’s a terrorist enemy combatant, is not only morally and legally right, it’s a necessary tool on the workbench of freedom,” patiently explained Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in a speech to an understanding gathering of Concerned Women for America. “We’re not detaining the spouses of everyday Americans; these are the women that the men who hate our freedoms love.”

Rumsfeld was responding to wildly-erroneous reports that American troops are systematically detaining the wives of known insurgents for the purpose of using them as “human shields” against future rejectionist attacks. “That’s just preposterous. Why, that would be unspeakably inhumane and illegal, and quite frankly, I would take offense to anyone who would dare accuse the United States of acting in such a reckless manner. No, what we’re doing is dangling the legally-detained wives of evil insurgents as carrots in order to bring about their peaceful surrender.” Secretary Rumsfeld went on to say that while no ransom demands had been made and that the innocent spouses would probably not be tortured or killed, he admitted that “all options are on the table.”

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales defended the seizures as being in accordance with Islamic law, as well as the stated intent of our country’s Founding Fathers. “It is a well-established custom in Muslim societies for women to be classified as property. In the original draft of our own Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson established that all Americans have the right to ‘life, liberty and property.’ Thus it is clear that as our brave troops fight for their lives and our liberty, they have a right to Iraqi property.” Gonzales further explained that the pesky Constitutional Amendments that address search and seizure issues also support the issue. “While the Fourth Amendment protects citizens against warrantless seizures, I direct your attention to the already-issued position paper regarding domestic NSA wiretaps. Simply put, we don’t need no stinking warrants.”

Although he is not obligated to comment on the issue, overqualified Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito added his legal gravitas to the settled debate. “Right and wrong are arbitrary terms applied by short-sighted Democrats, er, I mean people who fail to recognize that everything, including the Constitution, changed on 9/11. It’s a moot point, anyway. You see, these women aren’t American and they’re not in America. Their detention is as perfectly legal as rendition and torture in Eastern European secret prisons.”

Has SG’s Rex Kramer mentioned that his first column for The Blue Republic appears in tomorrow’s issue? If he has, we apologize for repeating it because, well, that’s just tacky.