Stop The Implication

-The National Post writes that comparing the two deaths was a "little absurd," and referenced Hamid Dabashi's editorial for CNN. Mr. Dabashi, a professor at Columbia University, writes that "there are more holes in Ahmadinejad's point than in that proverbial Swiss cheese." Ms. El-Sherbini, Dabashi writes, was the victim of a "vicious act of a neo-Nazi racist, while Neda Aqa Soltan was one among many other victims of violence at the hands of the security apparatus of the Islamic Republic."-

The article above was quoted from:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews/20091001/wl_ynews/ynews_wl936

This article really got my immediate attention. They are trying to imply a mode of subconcious acceptance by referring to a statement of a professor from a reputable education institution where Islam is portrayed as violent institution/body/subject who wrongfully misuse their power to kill an innocent person while in the other incident, the statement tried to imply that it was an isolated case (or rather acceptable) by a probably not that critically dangerous party by labelling them as a (mere) racist - of a neo-Nazi.

Mr. Professor, it's better for you to strip down all of your academic qualification as you had overlooked lots of basic understanding on human rights. Instead of making comparisons, can't you look at the similarities they shared?

In both cases, innocent lives were lost. It shouldn't have happened. Their lives were taken forcefully and wrongfully - out of their willingness. Both were killed by a group of society (as it tried to imply by the statement). One is of a so-called "violent hands from the Islamic Republic" and the other is a neo-Nazi racist.

If the argument is that of one is from the ruling authority, it should have been understood as an act of a person who probably misfired the gun while he tried to deliver his duty to contain a chaos. He was not out there to purposedly kill her, while the neo-Nazi motive was apparent. In the end, two lives have lost. The point is, whether the person represents the ruling authority or not, the fact is that both have killed innocent lives.

If the killer (though if it's accidental) of Neda Soltan were to be condemned guilty, so too were the killer of Marwa Ali El-Sherbini, moreover, her killer fights the ideology of Nazi. Therefore, there is no such argument which killer is more guilty than the other but instead both should have shared a fair amount of coverage for their condemnations. Or do the professor thinks that a killing by a Nazi believer is acceptable?

It is quite sad that a 'professor' forgets the fact of The Holocaust caused by the Nazis back in WWII. Millions of innocent lives were lost back then. Perhaps the professor needs help on trying to weigh both magnitudes of the disaster (by trying to "absurdly" compare Islam as a much more violent instutution with that of the Nazis). And he should have realized the difference between the concept of religion as a way of life and Nazi as a political idealogy to obtain absolute power.

Please do not misuse the word Islam for your propaganda. I know you are trying to imply a negative impact on Iran but please, do not associate and drag my holy religious into your dirty propaganda.

Actually, there's no need for anyone to propagate. Two lives have lost - unwillingly and illegally. Both parties should be held equally responsible and accountable for the unfortunate deaths, therefore there's no such thing as "absurd comparison" as there is no such comparison to begin with at the first place - but more of unfortunate similarities.

You are welcome to visit me if you need any help, Mr. Professor.