Excusing atrocity

It’s simply not so that this blog is wedded to one political line.   If we were having conservative values rammed down our throat or ecclesiastic coercion, we’d be blogging against that too.  I’ve a post coming up against Christian fundamentalists, for example.

Doesn’t mean individual authors don’t believe certain things personally but the brief of this blog, its prime directive, is to tackle humbug and expose it, to tackle dogma and oppose it, and that is so for any humbug or dogma of any colour.   If there is more anti-Muslim than anti-Israel, it is because there is so much dishonesty involved.

A perfect illustration of this has been the whole Palestinian issue.  John C. Wright has written on this photo:

Now I don’t care which side did it.  If it was the Catholic Church, we’d be down on it, if it was the Knesset, we’d be scathing, if it was the Muslims, we’d be outspoken.

How was this photo used?  It was used in an article by one of the establishment academics ranting against Israel:

Thus when television cameras show the bodies of children killed in an Israeli air raid, Jacksonian Americans are sorry about the loss of life, but it inspires them to hate and loathe Hamas more, rather than to be mad at Israel. They blame the irresponsible dolts who started the war for all the consequences of the war and they admire Israel’s strength and its resolve for dealing with the appalling blood lust of the unhinged loons who start a war they can’t win, and then cower behind the corpses of the children their foolishness has killed.

And the child in the picture is a victim of Israel, right?

Wrong.  Here what really happened, shortly after the child’s parents were tortured before his eyes:

The child was clutching his mommy’s bloody corpse when Sandra Samuel, a domestic, emerged from a hiding place in the house, snatched up the child, and ran with him to safety.

Including the Holtzbergs, four Israelis, an American Jew and a Mexican woman were gunned down in the attack on Chabad House in Bombay. This was a charity house, where the couple ministered to people from the community and welcomed them to pray or celebrate.

The return of the bodies was delayed until authorities removed hand grenades from the bodies, left there by the attackers.

Now my question is – will any leftist whatever accept responsibility for supporting such animals?   The most we’ll ever get is “well, all sides commit atrocities” and the more usual, as if it’s some kind of numbers game of oneupmanship is “Israel does worse”.

Nowhere will a leftist condemn this.   And the one quoted above not only ignores it but pretends the child was a victim of Israel.  That’s what we’re all up against here – not only the atrocities but the leftist excusing of them.

John C. Wright comments:

It is a source of neverending astonishment and horror to me that our sophomoric elites continue to pride themselves on their moral and mental superiority to the vast majority of man, and all previous ages, and every person not of their political party.

My astonishment would be less if the evidence of their crippling moral inferiority, their inability to understand even the simplest of syllogisms, their ghastly parochialism and uniformity of newspeak and doublethink were not so painfully in evidence.

And here is the sin of the left:

Sin darkens the intellect, lest the lantern of thought expose one’s own guilt to condemnation. Any standard or moral rule you make yourself too stupid to contemplate or imagine, you need not fear you fall short of or betray. Sin deadens the moral sense, numbs the nerve of conscience, which otherwise speaks with a soft and divine voice.

Those who are innocent of the truth speak like innocent men, in something of a clean and childish barbarism. Those who hate the truth are no innocent. They hate what has the power to destroy them.

And they hunger, with the hunger of vampires for life’s blood, for the moral vindication and applause their own unqietly dead consciences cannot give,  and so they seek in all things to affirm their own self-flattery by condemning the heroic and applauding the depraved.

If the word for “right” is “dexter”, then what is the word for “left”?

4 Responses to “Excusing atrocity”

  1. Amfortas December 4, 2012 at 12:11 Permalink

    Last week it was some dorkish apologist for Hamas using a picture of a Syrian child and claiming it was a Gazean. The availability of so many photographs for illustrating this point or that exceeds the mendacity demands of the left.

  2. A K Haart December 4, 2012 at 12:17 Permalink

    Good post – none so blind as those who won’t see.

  3. Umbongo December 4, 2012 at 12:23 Permalink

    Amfortas

    The “dorkish apologist for Hamas” you refer to is I assume Jon Donnison – a “reporter” on Mideast affairs for the “impartial” but oddly left-leaning BBC

  4. JD December 4, 2012 at 13:25 Permalink

    I would never trust any photograph in the press. My questions are always ‘when and where was that’ and ‘how convenient that a photographer happened to be there at just the right moment with sufficient time to frame and focus the image’
    Here is one of the most famous fakes-
    http://www-tc.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/files/2008/08/capa_essay_01.jpg

Leave a Reply

Please copy the string tdqguR to the field below: