Understanding Daniel Pipes?

Submitted by Michael S (United States), Sep 16, 2017 at 02:07

Debanjan,

I think you are having a language problem here, or you are not very familiar with Daniel Pipes, or both. Just for the record,

1. Daniel Pipes does not support what has been called "terrorism". He has tried to tell you twice now, that the term is essentially meaningless. From my own observation of the matter, a "terrorist" has come to mean a violent person supporting a cause you oppose. Thus, the Turks call the Kurds "terrorists" and the Kurds call the Turks "terrorists". Likewise, the (now disbanding) Free Syrian Army called the Assad Regime and Hizbullah "terrorists", but the Assad Regime and Hizbullah called the Free Syrian Army "terrorists". This reasoning runs across the board. Daniel has correclty identified the problem, but you seem oblivious to it.

2. Daniel does not put himself forth as the arbiter of morality in the world. He is American and Jewish (as well as Polish, technically), and is concerned with the well-being of these people. America, Poland and the Jewish people have all been targeted by Islamists; but then, we have also been targeted by the UN, European countries and Leftists. It would be "convenient" for the US, for Poland and for the Jews, if the violent people who hate us would all be somethow neutralized by, say, a selective self-induced hypnotic spell. This is not likely to happen, any time soon, so we have to deal with reality as it happens; and the way it happens right now, ISIS and Hizbullah are busy killing one another. As they go about THAT pursuit, we are under no obligation to get involved; and Daniel has generally been supportive of this attitude over the years.

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".