|
Some comments on Ali Sina's
article titled "The
Day Principles Triumphed"
By
Nalinaksha
Ali Sina Said:
<<snip>>
.Then he equated America to the terrorists and the
most despicable countries of the world, and said "often enemies resemble
each other". He continued with his harangue berating the President and said
Bush has not been a uniter but a divider. Then he equated America to the
terrorists and the most despicable countries of the world, and said "often
enemies resemble each He continued with his harangue berating the President
and said Bush has not been a uniter but a divider.
Response:
Consider the 100,000 plus killed in Iraq, consider the 500,000 children
who died in Iraq because of sanctions and which was then rationalised by the
then Secretary of State Madeline Albright as "a tough choice", consider the
fact of Osama bin laden being trained by America and then introduced in a
country which had women as ministers, teachers and doctors, consider the
fact that America harbours known terrorists like Emmanual Constant of
Haiti--why should not American state be called a terrorist stae? For a more
detailed account of America's actions read Rogue State by willium Blum.
<<snip>>
In one word the answer is PRINCIPLES.
Response:
The PRINCIPLES that is evidenced by the history of American support for
despotic regimes?
If a group of people believes that it is their God-given
duty to murder those who disagree with their belief, to subdue and
humiliate people of other religions, to beat their women, to rape (or
as they call it, give in "marriage") girls as young as nine years old,
to stone the single mothers or to behead the unbelievers, that belief
does not have to be respected. Not all beliefs deserve respect. In
fact no belief deserves respect. All beliefs must be scrutinized
weighed with facts and if found wanting, they must be discarded. Beliefs
and opinions are not sacred. What is sacred is human life and human
rights.
Response: With this touchstone how do we judge
the American chest beating for "freedom"?
A cynic may ask then what about creationism. Isn't this an absurd
belief? Why a secularist would vote for a president who is a
creationist? The answer is; yes creationism is absurd. But that is not
the only absurd belief. Everyone is guilty of believing in some
absurdity. Is the belief in God logical? Or is the belief in atheism
logical? Neither of these beliefs is logical. In fact the moment you
believe you step into the realm of illogicality. All beliefs are
illogical. Beliefs do not rest on logical proof or material
evidence. That is why they are called beliefs. If they did, they would
be called facts.
<<snip>>
The reason many secularists supported a religious candidate is
precisely because of this. We felt that the liberals have lost the notion
of right and wrong. That in their zest to "respect opinions
of mankind", they are not only ignoring their human rights and their
needs but also endangering the peace of mankind.
Response: But isn't notions
of "right and wrong" a matter of belief, and being matters of belief aren't
they illogical as you said two paragraphs back ?
Wills names France, Britain, Germany, Italy and Spain as paragons
of enlightenment and laments that America is not like them. What is so
great about these countries? The common denominator of all of
them is moral relativism. Weren't the French high ranking...
Response: So is it moral relativism when it is
okay to bombard civilian populations or to destroy their infrastructure as
America has done in very recent past?
politicians who received $1.7 billion dollars in bribe of Iraq 's
oil-for-food fund from Saddam to peddle on his behalf in the UN?
Didn't several members of the UN receive kickbacks from Saddam for the
same reason and from the same fund when the Iraqi children were dying
by thousands every day for the lack of food? With all that going
on, the liberals had the chutzpa to blame America for the sanctions.
Aren't these "enlightened" European countries vying with
Response: Two UN officials
resigned over the sanctions. The sanctions were medieval in its brutality
and they were maintained because of US insistence. Also mind you the US
destroyed the water treatment plants KNOWINGLY. This led to contaminated
water. Let us also not forget about depleted uranium which has led to
increased cancer among Iraqis.
<<snip>>
each other to sign trade agreements with rogue regimes such as the
Iranian Mullahs, disregarding completely the fact that these are
Response: During Iraq-Iran war, US supplied
Iraqi's and got Israel to supply Iranians. The idea was that Iraq and Iran
should bleed each other to death. Israel holds some kind of a record in
violsting UN resolutions and we of course know how much US props up Israel.
Knowing US history it is not surprising when you consider that US also
supported Apartheid South Africa.
<<snip>>
The reason Bush received the vote of many secularists is because we were fed
up with the liberals' hypocrisy and their moral relativism. We found Bush
to be a man of principles. He does what he believes to be right. We may
disagree with him but we can trust him because we
Response:
I agree with you partially. Bush really believes that
God talks to him Of course what does this tell you about so called
"free-thinkers" who consider Bush to be principled?
<<snip>>
This election should not be considered as a triumph of religious
fundamentalism. It is rather a triumph of principles. It is a
rebellion against decadence and moral relativism. It is a rejection of
political correctness. It is a victory of justice and truth.
We, the secularists who supported Bush, did not support him for his
religious views. We supported him because we found him to be a man
of principles. Many of his views were not popular. But he stuck to...
Response: On the
contrary it is now very clear that about half the Americans consider
themselves to be God's own country and do not care about loss of life
and limbs for non-Americans. So if your principle is that America is
right in whatever she does, then the principle is logically consistent
with your action but it is one which is beyond my definition of justice
and fairness.
Evil is real, just as darkness is real. Islamic
fundamentalism is evil in every sense. We need a leader to stand
against this evil ...
Response:
Islamic fundamentalism was also evil in the two decades when America
supported and encouraged it. Do remember America is the only country which
has been condemned of terrorism by the World court in the matter of
Nicaragua.
with strength of character and determination. What was Kerry's
response to Islamic Terrorism? "We'll reach out to Muslims" he said.
This is not good enough! If someone is attacking you with the intent
to kill you, you can't reach out to him. You have to defend yourself.
Kill him or you'll be killed. Muslims can't be reached. They are not
listening. They are not open to dialogues. They burn books written
critical of Islam and kill their authors. They are like zombies
programmed to kill. They are not coming to our Internet forums and ban
us if we go to theirs. (See my failed attempt to reach out to Muslims.
Try them and see if you have a better chance.) But they are determined
to kill us. Their faith is unwavering. Their resolve is unshaken. We
have no other choice but to fight back.
Response: The
above paragraph is classic American. They have used such arguments in the
past to justify genocide agfainst and entire people. Similar arguments were
used to justify the genocide of the native Americans and the murder of
600,000 Filipinos and 4 million Vietnamese.
These are no doctors! They have no understanding of
the gravity of the situation in which we live. Evil must be fought,
terrorism must be quashed. Truth may vary from person to person but
justice is the same to everyone. Oppression is wrong, whether
it is in Iraq, Iran or in Europe. If you can't tolerate a
despot, jailing people for ...
Response:
Good. Now read US history and its interventions and then say the above
with a straight face.
Thanks, but no thanks! I will
stick with a president who prays to his God no matter how irrational it
may be but can istinguish the right from wrong and is not squeamish to say
it.
Response:
Which of course demonstrates only the phoney nature of your arguments!
By what standards of right and wrong is the killing of 100,000 people
justified?
Despite the losers' claim this
election was not about the gay rights, science vs. faith, economy or
even the war. It was about principles. It was about values, about
human decency and justice. It was a triumph of truth over
political correctness and a victory of principles over moral
relativism.
Response: I now understand why an
article in Daily Mirror of UK called US " Land of the freak and home of
the knave".
With best wishes.
Nalinaksha
Bhattacharyya
| |
Debate with Syed M. Islam:
|
|
