>>We can only be grateful that once there was a government with and enlightened policy toward rehabilitating dissidents and a brave newspaper that could foresee the consequences of a liberal approach to incarceration.
>>
>>Imagine if this had been left to Guantanemo and Fox News.
>>
>>http://paracom.paramountcommunication.com/ct/2284433:2612563868:m:1:114540802:C756776C434C2AD678C65489AD7D5928
>>
>>And Walter Duranty was yet to come.
>
>Which way are you going here Charles.
>
>A if only we had Guantanamo in the 1920s we wouldn't have had Hitler and the Nazis
>
>B Incarceration of political figures leads to their radicalisation.

I am just glad that with all the unpleasantness going on in the 20s they were still able to honor this war veterans civil right's and not detain him indefinitely. Our current administration could well learn a lesson as we detain so many innocent people with the misguided idea that somehow they may do what they say the will do if they are released. ( after all, enlightened minds knew Hitler didn't mean all that stuff in Mein Kampf )

Rehabilitation should always be the goal (there is no such thing as a *bad* boy and no true intellectual believes in evil ) The benefit of the doubt should always go to the detained.

The NYT, prescient as they so often were in the present and future of totalitarian despots (vis Duranty on the Ukranian famine and the show trials - and saving the public the revelation of his pederasty) earned Pulitzers for such trenchant analysis.

I am sure our current security apparatus would have been less likely to recognize Hitler's rehabilitation and had they let him loose Fox would have reported it as if it were a bad thing.

And then where would we be.