GOLDSTEIN: A reader’s response to my column on ‘Taqiyya’

The Toronto Sun recently received a response criticizing my April 27 column, “The lying liars of Hamas and the useful idiots who believe them: Hamas practises ‘Taqiyya’ — a religious justification for lying to enemies in war,” from Walter Thomas Beckett.

Article content

It was too long to run as a letter to the editor so we published an edited version on Wednesday.

Article content

But, since Mr. Beckett wanted it published in full, I’m going to do so today.

Here is his letter:

“At the outset, I congratulate Mr. Goldstein for demonstrating proof positive the first casualty of war is the Truth.

“As an educated person and a professional journalist, you surely know ‘Taqiyya’ does not apply to agreements made between parties with respect to land, possessions and halting of military operations.

“Rather, ‘Taqiyya’ is the option allowed Muslims to deny their faith when faced with self preservation when threatened with torture and/or death — a denial which under these circumstances is acceptable to Allah as the individual’s inner self does not deviate from Muslim principles.

Article content

Article content

“The best example of ‘Taqiyya’ is a Muslim eating pork and drinking beverage alcohol to hide one’s Muslim identity in the company of a squad of Crusaders or a platoon of Israeli military.

“Mr. Goldstein, your spurious twisting of the concept of ‘Taqiyya’, and the publishing of this misinformation, delivers a clear message of blatant Islamophobia. The ‘opinion’ piece deviates substantially from the standards required from a professional journalist wherein a basis of truth is required.

“As such, I demand the Toronto Sun publish a clarification of the true meaning of “Taqiyya” as founded in the writings of many Muslim scholars. Clearly, the Muslim culture is willfully misunderstood and misrepresented by Mr. Goldstein so as to make such a clarification mandatory.

Article content

“The opinion piece also misrepresents history in the discussion of the Six Days War when the State of Israel undertook pre-emptive strikes, contrary to international law, to occupy the Palestinian territories of the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza. Similar to the situation in France, Belgium, and the Netherlands during World War II, armed resistance by the residents of the occupied territory is allowed provided the actions are consistent with international law respecting civilians and wounded combatants unable to continue to fight.

“In listing the dates when Hamas lied, Mr. Goldstein cleverly overlooks the many instances of Israeli aggression within the occupied Palestinian territories including the intermittent defiling of the Al Aqsa Mosque by Israeli Occupation Forces and Settlers from the illegal Zionist communities, the many raids into Palestinian refugee communities and slaughter of their residents by either the Israeli military or their proxies, the ongoing military blockade of Gaza which turned the enclave into an open air prison, or the Israeli response to the Gaza Great March of Return when Israeli snipers shot unarmed civilians contrary to international law.”

“But I digress from the main issue and wish to reemphasize the requirement for a clarification by the Toronto Sun of the actual meaning of ‘Taqiyya. I look forward to your publication of this clarification. As an easy alternative, you could publish this letter in its entirety.”

My response was that my column was about how Hamas practises ‘Taqiyya’ by deceitfully proposing truces with Israel to create the false impression it wants peace, when its real goal is to destroy it, but on this and his other criticisms, readers can read my column, Mr. Beckett’s response, and decide for themselves.

Article content