Seeking Truth In Comments are Harder When No One Wants to Hear the True Answers

Submitted by M. Tovey (United States), Jan 3, 2011 at 19:38

Greetings Mr. Zala:

Initially, I had not intended to make a direct response to this corroboration of similar thinking, trying instead to see where the thinking of Mr. Banerjee was leading him. He did not provide anything other than idealistic rhetoric to underscore his perspective: yet not surprisingly, when confronted with an opposing evaluation of the circumstances he desired to challenge, he resorts to canned philosophical invectives heard over and over and over again as reasons for making hero worship of people that have no regard for truth or rule of law.

Now, from my perspective, I do believe I understand why he does this. To be sure, in the vast expanses of world history, there is so much in the way of inequities purposed and perpetrated upon the masses by entities and their consorts of a devious type that it is a wonder that it has gone on so long, so much so as to boggle the rational mind as it struggles with the eons old question: why?

Unfortunately, so many think that adopting an opposite reactionary posture is the answer, not realizing that any lawlessness results in more lawlessness. Think of the irony of the Soviet style of communism combating the Nationalist Socialists in the 1940's, that in defeating them, Germany was doubly punished by its separation into East and West, giving the world a contrasting look of communist controlled lives versus lives governed by a more equitable rule of law. Assange's attitude lends to the very idea that an illegal act is justified if the ideology is served. We have plenty of that in America, as can be seen in the attitude of Assange's accomplice. Mr. Banerjee is also consenting to that.

Now that is not to say the methodologies of all democratic forms of government are perfect; for we know that is not true. And while I, as an American, may say that the Constitution of the United States presents a better form to govern equitably (that is if it was allowed to function as originally intended), we know too, that many who are placed in specific areas of responsibilities do not necessarily render true service and are a liability to a society that needs justice in truth to function in full transparency to its people.

But as it is seen globally, such is hard to come by, leaving the trusting population vulnerable to whatever political diatribe that is used to justify less than honorable actions. This can be seen the most in governments that focus on partisan politics (not just Americans) for personal gains' sake, and leave the people to seek defenses from unconscionable perpetrators who defy the rule of law for their gain, whether monetary or for power.

Confessing that I do have a decidedly Biblical perspective on world issues, I have a basis for my rationale in making the point: Assange's methodology in spreading the 'news' does no one any great service, but instead helps the very activities Mr. Banerjee claims to have his hatred for. Think about it. The various political entities that are purported to be jeopardized in the release of such information want people like Mr. Banerjee to react as he has. It is the polemics they are desirous of, and they are counting on it.

The world as we see it today is functioning, or shall I say malfunctioning in pretty much the same dysfunctional way it always has for several thousand years. It will continue to do so for a little while longer. Then there will be a dramatic change, such as nothing anyone has ever experienced. By then, either people like Mr. Banerjee will realize the Holy Bible had it right all along, or maybe not. Nevertheless, it is my understanding of Biblical things that in any case, people such as that will be forced into a realization that without adopting a Biblical perspective and following the way of Jesus Christ in life, it will make no difference what Mr. Assange thought to reveal, finding out that it was the Holy Bible that should have been consulted for truth, and not the fables of the leaked documents.

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".