Watch the evasive language on Islamic jihad

Just go to the Globe, the CBC and read the evasive language. Neil Macdonald, senior editor of the CBC, was going on about the fault for the Orlando massacre being in all monotheistic religions, and that if we had ever snickered at a homophobic joke, our shared guilt was manifest. Doug Saunders in the Globe links the Orlando massacre to Republican dominated state legislatures not being pro-gay enough for his taste. Adam Radwanski on how Trump was being too quick to blame it on Islamic jihad because of

“an unverified rumour that the shooter had screamed “Allah hu Akbar” while opening fire.”

Oh, yes, Adam, and the killer had phoned in to 9-1-1 saying hwe was doing this killing on behalf of the Islamic state.But of course Trump was wrong and morally unhinged for linking this attack to jihad and Islam.

I try to remain as calm as I can but sometimes the situation calls for nothing less than outrage. I am disgusted – disgusted – by this kind of moral evasion and turpitude on the part of Macdonald, Radwanski, and Saunders.

As Mathew Hennessey writes in City Journal:

You don’t have to be Bernard Lewis to know that Omar Mateen was motivated by his Islamic faith to kill gay Americans. It would be nice if we could speak openly about this. It would be even better if our major media outlets wouldn’t twist themselves into politically correct pretzels trying to avoid “speculation” about a motive. Sometimes a jihad is just a jihad.

Bookmark and Share
Bill Elder

Listening to the disassociative narratives of the left after disasters are indicators that dogmatic leftism is a mental disorder.


If I understand the sense in which you are speaking, dogmatic leftism is, I agree, a mental disorder. We have to define our terms so they do not include a person ready to pay higher taxes for more social services, for example.
It would go like this:
1) the world is radically wrong;
2) we have certain knowledge of what is wrong;
3) what is wrong with the world derives from arrangements that can be discerned, described and fixed with certainty;
4) we have certain and correct knowledge of how to fix those evil social arrangements;
5) Those who oppose our proposals to improve life knowingly oppose fixing what can be fixed;
6) Our opposition is by definition in bad faith, because they, too, know how to fix matters and refuse to do it for reasons that can only be described as selfish.
Does that sum up the core of dogmatic leftism?

Bill Elder

If I read you correctly Dalwhinnie, I can crystalize your points with the following statement: The madness inherent in dogmatic leftism is a belief that all the evils of the world can be legislated, slandered or spent out of existence – even though there is ample historic evidence to prove this to be a morbidly fallible premise.

This belies a pathological belief in the immortal infallibility in the reasoning and abilities of the leftist dogmatic adherent – which is , self-evident madness.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *