"When you've never had any problems with the law and all of a sudden to be handcuffed and foot-chained and driven to RCMP headquarters and then to court, it's distressing," Duval [Hassan Diab's lawyer] said from his home in Trois-Rivieres, Que....[H]e's a devoted teacher who has the support of his students and the universities, Duval said....."This is a gentleman who is a very professional person and, of course, everyone is surprised by this thing that happened. You will have a hard time finding someone who will say something negative about him." – from this news article
He's "never had any problems with the law," yet "all of a sudden" is "handcuffed and footchained and driven to RCMP headquarters...its distressing." He is a part-time instructor at the University of Ottawa and Carleton University, where he is "a devoted teacher." He's "a gentleman." He's a "very professional person." And "you will have a hard time finding someone who will say something negative about him."
Ah yes. The idiotic irrelevancies.
Might it be possible that "a devoted teacher," "a gentleman," a "very professional person" of whom it can be said that "you will have a hard time finding someone who will say something negative about him" could possibly have been involved in a bombing outside a Paris synagogue that killed four people in October 1980?
Is it possible? Or does his devotion, his gentlemanliness, his professionalism, make it absurdly out of the question that he could have ever been involved in such a thing, even twenty-eight years ago?
Points for consideration:
Adolf Hitler was a vegetarian. He loved dogs. He loved children, provided they were blonde Aryan children.
Josef Stalin was a wonderful fellow, the Father of his Country and, come to think of it, of his Countrymen, who could always be counted on. And if you only saw the outpouring of grief in March 1953 in the Soviet Union, it certainly outdid the outpouring of grief for FDR in April 1945 in the United States, in both scope and duration. This grief was not all orchestrated. Much of it was clearly genuine.
As for Chairman Mao, one simply can't say enough about his splendid qualities. Why, his calligraphy alone is so distinctive and heart-warming that the ideograms on the sign advertising the Yenching Restaurant in Harvard Square are, or at least used to be, written in the exact calligraphic style of Chairman Mao. And where shall we begin with his natatory abilities, and his deep concern for the Chinese people?
And Germany all through the 1950s and 1960s and 1970s and 1980s and 1990s, in numbers ever-diminishing of course, because of Father Time and Mother Nature, had all kinds of men, some of sober mien, fine upstanding fellows, even some of them with those heartwarming crinkles around the eyes, who were liked by all the neighborhood. And few would have guessed, and many would not have cared, what those men did on the Eastern Front, or the Western, in the years between 1939 and 1945, or even, some of them, before the war began.
It's the same story.
Never caused any problem. Never swatted a fly. Never did any damage. Why don't you leave him alone? For god's sake, how far back must we go in our insensate urge to wreak a cruel revenge? And will punishing Diab, after all these years, bring anyone back anyway? What good would it do to punish him now?
But there was that bomb at that synagogue, and the people killed by, it is charged, among others, Hassan Diab, part-time instructor at the University of Ottawa and Carleton University, who managed to escape justice all these years. For the evidence against Diab must have been very strong, even overwhelming, for the RCMP to come knocking on his door.
And no one of sense should for one minute treat with anything but disgust those who seem to think his being a "caring" teacher -- or whatever it is some seem to think --mitigates what is charged. And what is charged is that Hassan Diab, part-time instructor at the University of Ottawa and Carleton University, participated in the mass-murder of people at a synagogue in Paris, on the rue Copernic, in October of 1980.
There are too many people who equate evil people as ugly, mean looking, snarly, but infact most of them like Ted Bundy were quite good looking and or very normal in character if not very polite. so this imman of the past has managed to live life safely among kafirs, and because of this we should look the other way? l say bring out the families of those killed by this monster and let us hear their stories of how their lives had changed since their loved ones are no more.
No such irrelevancies for the victims of the attack. Regardless of their qualities or lack of qualities, they are and they stay dead.
I think this "it can't be true" response stems from the fact that Western culture has discarded the concept of evil. Most people perceive all wrong-doing as the result of either illness or victimhood. So, if an individual is able to conduct their daily affairs without appearing "ill" (mentally or otherwise) or seeming like a "victim", then the common view of their fellow man is that "it must be a mistake". Their world view doesn't allow for any other reaction.
When I state my rejection of that view, I get uncomfortable responses from most of my friends and coworkers - because it isn't PC to do so. But I'm not stopping because I feel that as a society, we need to become aware of the fact that evil does exist, that it is a "rational" choice made by totally sane people and is not always motivated by grievances - but can be motivated by will alone. We need to come to the realization that we are ALL capable of evil - and to deny that capacity in anyone is a form of prejudice that, in my opinion, can be personally or societally fatal.
Let me encourage you all to be sure to point out that evil truly does exist - and that it's the only plausible explanation for many of the perceived incongruencies between people's words and actions, appearances and hidden activities.
Active Listener
"He's "never had any problems with the law,..." applies to most people before their first arrest.
The worst Mafia dons were generous and kind to family and friends. That didn't stop them from ordering hits on others. Everyone was born innocent. Everyone has people who love them. Good people do bad things. Those fathers who killed their daughters for the crime of speaking to a non-Muslim were "devoted family men". If this man should be "left alone" because he is so good then there are a lot of people in US jails who should immediately be let out. Two come to mind immediately: Ramos and Compean.
Which of these was the best family wo/man?
a.) Saddam Hussein
b.) Yasser Arafat
c.) Osama bin Laden
d.) Benazir Bhutto
"Before his arrest, Diab claimed he was often followed by people his lawyer later speculated were French officers operating in Canada."
He should be counting his blessings that they were not Israel officers.
Active listener, I was with you until you said we are ALL capable of evil. We are all capable of being sinful, but evil? The concept of "evil" seems to imply the limits of sin, something only very unusual people are capable of, people with no sense whatsoever that anything can come before their own egotistical desires.
In situations where people are stretched to the limits of endurance, some people simply cannot do anything they deem to be immoral, even if it means their own death, wheras others commit evil acts with barely a thought.
The range of human worthiness, I think, stretches to both ends of the continuum.
As for the topic at hand, brainwashing can cause people to lose their normal moral sense, and Islam, which I suppose most Muslims take with a grain of salt, can lead other personality types to extreme acts. But I suppose this is obvious.
Active Listener, YOU are evil for saying that people are evil, or for holding anyone accountable for their behavior. That's the pervasive attitude. The one who calls people out on the evil things they do or who simply refuse to tolerate evil -- we are the evil ones. It's Orwellian, but that's the way it is. The worst thing you can in this world is 'intolerant.' How dare I take issue with genocide, slavery, torture, rape, plunder, incest, child molestation, polygamy, endless dishonesty, etc., etc., etc? That is evil: taking issue with all of the above, not doing them.
PG,
When I used the word "evil", I was not limiting it to the extremes of behaviour that it connotates for you. To me, "evil" describes any immoral act, which can even include our thought lives in certain circumstances. And under that definition, we are all capable of and, if we are honest, have all commited evil.
I do however, agree that there are ranges of "human worthiness" as you describe it, and don't have any objection to you refining my position to differentiate between sinfulness on one extreme and evil on the other. I DO think though, that there are very few of us that know in advance how we would respond in those situations where we are "stretched to our limits of endurance". Furthermore, if we would ever find ourselves in such a situation, I believe that we would be less likely to commit an act of evil if we were realistic about the overall human condition than if we denied that evil exists - and denied that it could arise in our own hearts as well as the hearts of others.
Active Listener
jdamn,
Thanks for that - that's my point exactly. Our society truly has come to embrace the view that you describe - and likely many of my friends and coworkers see me as "ill" or a "victim" or even "evil" - as you say. But at least I've injected some discomfort into their thought lives. I think that a change in attitudes and beliefs can only be achieved when we are confronted with opposing viewpoints and have to decide for ourselves what to do with them.
Now, I know that many people will just reject my position outright - either ignore it or write it off - but there may be some that don't. It's that hope - that SOME people may examine their world view and expand it just a little because of my discussion(s) with them - that motivates me. I don't want to look back on my life and think that I didn't at least TRY to be an agent of change for what I believe to be the proper direction in the lives of those around me. After all, so much of this battle is taking place through "stealth" - so we need to engage our own countermeasures.
Active Listener
Saddam killed his sons-in-law, Arafat sent his wife and child away from him to Paris and sent them money he stole from PA coffers, and Benazir Bhutto ruthlessly sidelined her mother as party chief after she became Prime Minister, and according to her niece, was even behind the death of her younger brother Murtaza. Such nice family people.
In contast, Osama doesn't even have any honor killings associated with him, despite all his wives and children.