Lack of Standards

Submitted by Giulio Battiston (United States), Jul 22, 2003 at 11:15

Let's suppose, that all the arguments put forth by Mr Harris and reported by yourself, did in fact derive from contemplation of raw data. That is let's suspend the "in defense of interests" clause inherent in histories and analyses (quantum theory notwithstanding). Look now at your beautiful nation (North America) and judge it as would an impartial deity.

This is, I know, an impossible exercise but if violence begets violence then by God the USA has begotten. We know this to be true. Ask the Indian, Japanese, Panamanians, Chileans, Timorese, Angolans, Afghans, Iraquis and a long etc.

Can you forward convincing arguments as to the peaceful intentions of your nation?

When one is aware that your country has the highest pro rata prison population on the planet and has been involved in more aggresions outside its borders than any other it beggars belief that the solution to these problems is yet more of the same.

Mr Pipes, If your country really cared about liberating, it would not do business with the likes of its proclaimed enemies and would make every effort to condition that potential business to political change. It is not news that your companies are doing business with virtually all the axis of evil countries. The double standards you mention go far further than the context in which you mention them and many, especially the victims of the policies they beget, are fully aware of this. If terrorism is wrong it is equally wrong for all, and the "in defense of interests" clause does not elevate terrorist (in its strict definition) actions to moral ones.

Only when standards apply accross the board can we hope for peace.

Sincerely

Giulio Battiston

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".