We Must Destroy The Terrorist Infrastructure Of Massachusetts

I've been watching HBO's John Adams miniseries. And as I've mentioned before, it's odd how much it seems as though it could be about Iraq or the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, just with frillier costumes and fewer beards. I assume the makers of John Adams didn't do this on purpose; it's just that human nature and human war never change. Still, perhaps a few Americans will learn something from it about what it's like to be occupied and oppressed.

The second episode begins in 1775 as the British marched on Concord to capture munitions "illegally" held by the colonists. Soon afterward John Adams goes to Philadelphia from his home near Boston for the Second Continental Congress. The debate there is presented like every other debate about violent resistance through history—including that between, say, Hamas and Fatah. Note the position of the miniseries hero:

EDWARD RUTLEDGE: Rash action does not merit a rash response. Might must be met with reason, not arms!

SAM ADAMS: I remind Mr. Rutledge and Mr. Dwayne that blood has been shed. Massachusetts blood. While we debate, our militia is left without munitions, without arms, without even the slightest encouragement.

JOHN DICKINSON: One colony cannot be allowed to take its sister colonies headlong into the maelstrom of war...I move this assembly consider a humble and dutiful petition be dispatched to his Majesty, one that includes a plain statement that the colony desires immediate negotiation.

JOHN ADAMS: Mr. Dickinson, the time for negotiation is past. The actions of the British army at Lexington and Concord speak plainly enough. If we wish to regain our natural born rights, we must fight for them.

JOHN DICKINSON: We must provide a plan to convince Parliament to restore those rights.

JOHN ADAMS: Mr. Dickinson, my wife and young children live on the main road to Boston, fewer than five miles from the full might of the British Empire. Should they sit and wait for Gage and his savages to rob them of their home, their possessions, their very lives? No sir, power and artillery are the surest and most infallible conciliatory measure we can adopt!

JOHN DICKINSON: If you exclude the possibility of peace, Mr. Adams, then I tell you now, you will have blood on your hands.

JOHN ADAMS: And I tell you, Mr. Dickinson, that to hold out an olive branch to Britain is a measure of gross imbecility!

JOHN DICKINSON: If you continue to oppose our methods of reconciliation, then you will leave us no choice but to break off from you entirely and carry on the opposition in our way.

JOHN ADAMS: Your Quaker sensibilities do us a great disservice, sir. It is one thing to turn the other cheek, but to lie down in the ground like a snake and crawl toward the seat of power in abject surrender, that is quite another thing, and I have no stomach for it!

Soon afterward we see Abigail Adams and their children, left alone since John Adams is off in Philadelphia. And just like women and children in every colonial conflict that's ever existed, they're participating by manufacturing weapons. (In this case, musket balls.)

Clearly these "Americans" (which is some made-up name they've given themselves) are vicious lunatics. There can never be peace until they give up their insane culture of incitement!

And incredibly enough, even their women carry arms! How can we possibly negotiate with barbarians so utterly different from our peace-loving selves!?! (Click here to order pizza for our brave redcoats!)

(I got the John Adams DVD from HBO as part of their blugger publicity.)

—Jonathan Schwarz