To define: "innocence"

Posted on

Pamela over at Atlas Shrugs has given me food for thought this morning: are innocent civilians always truly innocent? And if so, what then?

Atlas Shrugs: The Innocent Civilian Meme
I am not buying into the innocent civilians meme. If by ignorance, complicity, neglect or helplessness the Lebanese wouldn’t throw Hezbollah out and establish a strong government, then they must pay the price for the sins of Hizbollah. And if people put up with dictatorships, theocracies, totalitarian regimes – as they did in Nazi Germany — they deserve what Hezbollah deserves. Our only concern should be who started the war. Hezbollah/Hamas initiated the use of force and so stepped outside the principle of rights.

One thought on “To define: "innocence"”

  1. What a stupid bit of Zio-Fascist propoganda. And a bleak way of looking at the world too. The writer says: “. . . if people put up with dictatorships, theocracies, totalitarian regimes – as they did in Nazi Germany — they deserve what Hezbollah deserves . . .” By which mangled bit of logic half of Europe should have stood trial at Nuremburg. And if “[o]ur only concern should be who started the war”, then Israel must be at fault for bombing innocent civilians at a beach in Gaza not long ago. Hezbollah/Hamas did not initiate the use of force, I’m sorry to inform your “enlightened” writer. And if one must invoke the “principle of rights” (note: how quick Israel’s apologists are with this one!), then surely the right of civilians to have access to humanitarian aid and medical care, the right of UN forces to carry out their duties and the right of the Palestinians to a just and fair peace must also be invoked. I am by no means a supporter of Hezbollah or Hamas (the latter was democratically elected to the PA; sad for Israel that the Palestinians had enough of the PLO and its panderings to Zionist policy in the Occupied Territories), but I sincerely believe that this sort of reductionist garbage does no one any good.

Comments are closed.