True Colours wrote on Oct 3
rd, 2013 at 12:02am:
THe West never kills people because of their views?
Why was Anwar Awlaki killed by the US?
Why did Bradley Manning face a possible death penalty?
Typical Western hypocrisy: "killing is bad (unless we are doing the killing)"
Actually the hypocrisy is in not condemning unjustifiable deaths.
I understand real politik is played by all players. It is not pretty but seems to be the feature of our species as soon as we organise into the smallest groups and begin the scramble for resources be it land, access to water or even women.
Within that context wars and conflicts occur, some more or less justified, all to be judged within the restrictions of its time and within the moral confines of those waging those wars. Especially when cultures overlap those moral confines get messy, as what is appropriate to one culture is terrible to anothers, and there arises the history wars.
But what is particularly idiotic is something as patently obviously odious to most normal sensibilities (and yes, I am aware I am exposed to criticism here and I accept that) is for an ordinary secular western person when confronted with a situation where a writer is condemned for writing a novel, is condemned to death, in some cases by people who haven't even read the novel and the usual and reflexive action of the left, is not to say, poo, yeah that is bad, but to say, hey back in 1198 Christians did something similar.
It adds nothing but it does attempt to diminish a modern culpability by comparing it to an ancient one. If nothing else it is reflexive and lazy. At best it gives the impression that the modern writer is excusing a modern atrocity.