In my article The Difference Between Intentional Murder and Unintentional Deaths, I ridiculed the logic of a blogger who saw no fundamental difference between Hezbollah and the IDF. He brought up two warring parties, one of which initiated hostilities against the other, and both of whom have killed non-combatants.

As counter-argument I brought up an example from history completely appropriate to the issue: I mentioned WWII where we also had two warring parties, one of which initiated hostilities against the other, and both of which killed non-combatants. Because I mentioned the Nazis, the blogger evaded discussing my argument by issuing the following comment:

Hey Bernie, go fuck yourself and your specious Godwin's Law argument. My logic is sound, yours is inevident.

Israel, finally, has lost the PR war this time around.

I couldn't care less about what sort of person you think I am. If, as by your words I'm led to believe, you support Israel's military policy then you're wrong. And I'm right.

Although I did not call him an antisemitic piece of shit, which is what he certainly deserves to be called, he found it necessary to hurl an invective against me. I left more comments for which he was unable to raise a proper defense and so he deleted those and now he no longer accepts my comments on his site.

Predictably, as most leftist bloggers are wont to do, he invokes Godwin's Law to avoid addressing issues for which he has no sound argument. Allow me to explain to those who do not know, that Godwin's Law only applies to bringing up a comparison to Hitler, the Nazis, the Gestapo, etc. in forums and comment sections when such a comparison is irrelevant or malapropos.

Here's Glenn Greenwald's view:

Salon.com, The odiousness of the distorted Godwin’s Law

Responding to the neocon objections to my post on the universality of war-justifying propaganda, Kevin Drum writes that it’s “time to repeal Godwin’s Law” — at least the distorted version which purports to prohibit all comparisons to German crimes — labeling it an “an endlessly tiresome way of feigning moral indignation.” Kevin adds: ”WWII analogies are extremely useful because they’re familiar to almost everyone.” I agree: the very notion that a major 20th Century event like German aggression is off-limits in political discussions is both arbitrary and anti-intellectual in the extreme. There simply are instances where such comparisons uniquely illuminate important truths ... To demand that German crimes be treated as sacred and unmentionable is to deprive our discourse of critical truths.