[lit-ideas] Comments on Stans articles
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 19:54:23 -0700
Phil,
My take on Stan's last two articles:
Both the articles that are the occasion of your objection illustrate
something very important, that the conflict we are witnessing is between a
Liberal Democracy and forces that favor tyrannical authoritarianism*. The
Lebanese girl isn't exaggerating when she says that if she were to be a Jew
asking similar help under similar circumstances from the Jihadists, she
would be killed and they would think they had done a good thing by killing
an infidel. We read about such things in the newspapers, often by
Leftist-oriented reporters who excuse the abuses because the Muslims
perpetrating them have been downtrodden by someone or something. Modern
Psychology assures us they are not responsible for their own actions.
The other article, the Haaretz editorial draws our attention at a broader
level to the same thing: a Liberal Democracy is fighting against the forces
of tyrannical authoritarianism*, in this case Militant Islam in the form of
a Terrorist organization (two if we count Hamas) bent upon their
destruction. What good is a cease fire? What good is a peace treaty with a
force that has sworn your destruction? Let them say first that they
recognize Israel's right to exist and then talk about a peace treaty. Can
there be peace between you and someone who has sworn to kill you?
Militant Islam has incorporated the worst characteristics of European
anti-Semitism into their anti-Israel campaign. They treat the Protocols of
Zion as though they represented fact. Who is ignorant enough not to know
the Protocols of Zion is a fiction? There is no excuse for anyone in this
modern age to pretend that the Protocols of Zion are fact. While there is
no excuse, a force that is authoritarian and tyrannical can lie to its
people and convince them that the Protocols of Zion is fact. Also, they
treat the Holocaust as a fiction. It is interesting that many in the Europe
that in bygone days was the home of so much anti-Semitism have warmed up to
these Militant tyrannical authoritarians as they exhibit the old-fashioned
anti-Semitism to a remarkable degree. This is one of the disgusting
elements in this modern struggle, but it is after all a mere distraction.
The Militant Islamists would soon feel the same way about Denmark should
those happy people and Israel be able to change places.
Israel is a Liberal Democracy and is indeed on the front lines of this
struggle against Militant Islam. There can be no moral equivalency in this
regard. Militant Islam must be opposed especially wherever it is doing what
it was designed to do -- fighting against any infidel or nation of infidels,
especially Liberal Democracies. They don't want peace and they don't want
truces or peace treaties unless they need a break from their ongoing
relentless campaign to destroy all infidels.
* Some here love to quibble about words or expressions, but the difficulty
with being able to use one term to fit all that Militant Islam is and is
mounting in the way of aggression against the West, against the US, against
Israel, and against infidels is endemic in the nature of Militant Islam
itself. They don't want to use one expression unless it is "Islam." They
don't think of themselves as a sect. They are engaging in what Islam urges
them to do. The Jihad is part of their religion and they are being true to
it and the names the west uses like "Islamism," "Militant Islam," "Islamic
Fundamentalism," and "Jihadism" are signs of the West's ignorance. They are
merely being Muslims, no more and no less. For the purposes of this note I
have used an expression, Tyrannical Authoritarianism, that is an attribute
of their ideology. Their Islam admits of no other authority. It demands
compliance with the Sharia. Thus a wounded Jew if captured by Hezbollah or
other Jihadists would be killed in compliance with Islam (as they see
Islam). It is also being true to Islam in its unending relentless attempts
to destroy the Infidels inhabiting the nation, which they don't consider a
nation, called Israel.
Lawrence
-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Phil Enns
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2006 6:03 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] A Favour Please
I would like to ask a favour from those who contribute to the list.
Please don't post articles or parts of articles without commenting.
I ask this for two related reasons. First, I am part of this list
because I am interested in hearing what the others on this list have to
say about whatever topics are of interest. I want to hear what Omar or
Stan or Lawrence think, not some talking head. There are plenty of
services that collect articles and editorials so this list need not.
Second, an article posted without comment leaves me wondering about the
relationship between the content of the article and the poster. Does
Omar, or Stan, agree with the whole article, parts of it, and which?
Tell me if the article reflects your understanding and if you disagree
at points, why?
I have begun deleting posts that appear to be comprised of forwarded
articles. This isn't because I am not interested in the topics but
rather because reading them defeats the purpose of my belonging to this
list. May I suggest providing comments and then either pasting parts
of the article or linking to it. This may not always be appropriate but
I would appreciate it. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Phil Enns
Toronto, ON
Other related posts:
