Archive for Monday, October 2, 2006


October 2, 2006


To the editor:

The terrorist problem is not Muslim extremism; the problem is unreasoning fanaticism of all sorts. The two most destructive acts of terrorism in America took place, first, in Oklahoma City and, later, in New York City. The terrorists in both cases harbored a grudge against the United States that they expressed by causing the death of thousands of innocent people. They served causes we should think are opposites; one from the fanatical American right and the other from fanatical Muslims. All of them were willing to die for their respective causes.

The irrationality exhibited in both cases is no less obvious than the extremism. Those who were killed were not responsible for the hatred that possessed the souls of their killers, who were not dissuaded by innocence. Such motivation is sometimes called ideological but ideas do not motivate such action; hatred for perceived injustice does. The ideology is a rationalizing overlay.

The leaders who propagate such ideology do not seek death for themselves because of it, they are violent political people seeking power over others. Some of these ideologies are religious, some are not. It is not surprising that two such religious ideologies believe God approves the killing of innocents.

Richard Cole,



lunacydetector 11 years, 4 months ago

Correct me if i'm wrong but Timothy McVeigh was an atheist when he bombed in OKC.

The problem with the Arabs (and people from Ottawa) is all the inbreeding - over 50% marry their first cousin. THAT has to take a toll after many generations, especially in the little bedouin groups. (The Ottawa part was my attempt at humor.)

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 11 years, 4 months ago

Jeez, these are some very revealing posts this morning. The baseless prejudice expressed is either irrational hatred based on pure ignorance, or a parody thereof.

Richard Heckler 11 years, 4 months ago

Meanwhile the Iraq and Afghanistan death toll mounts consisting primarily of innocent human beings that which includes our soldiers. Not good diplomacy.

The Oklahoma City bombers did not represent the United States anymore than the New York City killers represented Pakistan,Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia. Iraq was never implicated in the matter except by the White House. It was a small band of terrorists in both cases not necessarily representing any country or government.

davisnin 11 years, 4 months ago

I don't recall McVeigh belonging to a pervasive religious movement with agents and resources all over the world. He was just a nut. You can't compare Columbine and Beslan either. That reminds me, they attack the people not at war in Iraq as well. Hmmm. You can find random acts of violence anywhere, that doesn't mean that Muslim extremism is a non-issue.

damnocracy 11 years, 4 months ago

Not sure where people get the idea that McVeigh was some far-right, religious nut (okay, yeah, they get it from stupid websites), but McVeigh was an admitted atheist dis-satisfied with our government.

As ridiculous as some on the far right can be, the people out there claiming that they are as dangerous as Islamic extremists need to be rounded up and sent off to have supper with Pat Robertson, followed by dinner with some terrorists in Afganistan and Iraq.

Sure, Pat Robertson is a wack job from time to time, but ol' Pat won't wack your head off. Even Fred Phelps will only scream that you are going to hell--he ain't gonna send you there via an express killing.

Islamic exremists, on the other hand, will certainly will wack your head off, whether you are a conservative or a liberal, an adult or a child.

The author who wrote the letter to the editor is just babbling. There is no comparison.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.