Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

Jimmy the Dhimmi: Darfur isn’t genocide…but Israel, on the other hand…

Allah nails Jimmah on this one.

And to think I was worried that that supergroup he formed with Mandela might not be helpful.

“There is a legal definition of genocide and Darfur does not meet that legal standard. The atrocities were horrible but I don’t think it qualifies to be called genocide,” he said. Washington is almost alone in branding the 4 1/2 years of violence in Darfur genocide. Khartoum rejects the term, European governments are reluctant to use it and a U.N.-appointed commission of inquiry found no genocide, but that some individuals may have acted with genocidal intent. Carter, whose charitable foundation, the Carter Center, worked to establish the International Criminal Court (ICC), said: “If you read the law textbooks … you’ll see very clearly that it’s not genocide and to call it genocide falsely just to exaggerate a horrible situation I don’t think it helps.

The point here isn’t that he think Darfur fails to qualify as a textbook case of genocide; other international bodies agree, although most prominent American politicians do not. The point is that he’s resorting to a textbook definition in the first place. If you’re dealing with murder on a scale so massive that it might arguably constitute genocide, by what insane logic is it preferable to err on the side of saying that it isn’t genocide and thereby eschew the tremendous moral force that comes with that term? If it’s genocide then thoughts turn to the Holocaust and the world is compelled to intervene. If it isn’t then it’s a civil war gone bad that’ll work itself out — eventually. Jimmeh likes the latter approach because it appeases the Sudanese government and, theoretically, makes them more amenable to negotiations. After they’ve already killed 200,000 people.

That’s one reason why using the textbook definition is offensive. There’s another reason, too: namely, that Carter hasn’t always been such a stickler for precision when applying that vaunted moral yardstick of his. If it’s so desperately “unhelpful” to go throwing around the concept of genocide even when it arguably applies, explain this

The last link above shows where Peanuthead says that Israel is doing much worse than what’s happening in Darfur.  But no, Jimmah isn’t an anti-Semite who coddles dictators and mass murderers while poormouthing his own country!  Why would anyone think otherwise?  For those of you on the left, the prior two sentences were sarcasm.

Advertisement

October 8, 2007 - Posted by | anti-Semitism, Carter, Darfur, dhimmitude, shameful

4 Comments »

  1. Is it not true that if the word GENOCIDE is used, the UN is compelled to become militarily involved?

    Much easier for Carter to insist on non-use of the word genocide than to show even further, just how useless the UN is.

    Comment by Lee | October 8, 2007

  2. Out of respect for the office of President of the United States and former holders thereof…I ask will someone PLEASE get this man professional help?

    Comment by The Truth Hurts | October 8, 2007

  3. Jimmeh likes the latter approach because it appeases the Sudanese government

    And we all know how much liberals love appeasing terrorist regimes….

    Comment by Kanaka Girl | October 9, 2007

  4. When will Jimmy go away? Please, make him go away!

    Comment by Henry | October 9, 2007


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 25 other followers