>> He latched on to the things that he favours. I didn't hear him say that the towers were destroyed and thousands killed because he (Fallwell) and his friends and followers are infidels, nor did I hear that it was because women wear short sleeves and are allowed to go to school. Once again, the bottom line is that Fallwell chose to spread hate regarding his own pet biases. Terrorist dogma has nothing to do with it. This is on him and him alone.

>> Besides he attributed it to the fact that God was angry, not the terrorists.

I hear ya! However I would insert the word "believes" in lieu of "favors". And I would hesitate to call deeply-held moral convictions as pet biases.

I only wonder what you mean by spreading hate. Are you saying that because Falwell believed that the 9/11 attack was a punishment of God, that was spreading hate?

Again, I am not defending any wrong actions (or beliefs) on Falwell's part. I am only saying that his pronouncements were in line with his (and many Christian's) belief system. It seems to me that his pronouncement was more of a "See I told ya it was going to happen, but you wouldn't listen."

Many Christians do believe that God is (was) angry with the immorality in America (especially since America has had the benefit of the gospel since its inception). This notion is in line with normal Christian belief. And quite often throughout the Bible, God used ungodly nations to punish immorallity (read about the
conquests of the Babyaonian king, Nebuchadnezzar, for example).

Jeremiah 25:9
Behold, I will send and take all the families of the north,’ says the LORD, ‘and Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon, My servant, and will bring them against this land, against its inhabitants, and against these nations all around, and will utterly destroy them, and make them an astonishment, a hissing, and perpetual desolations.
Jeremiah 25:8-10

Ezekiel 26:7
“For thus says the Lord GOD: ‘Behold, I will bring against Tyre from the north Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses, with chariots, and with horsemen, and an army with many people.


>> I just don't see any excuses being acceptable for this sort of behaviour - especially carefully picking and choosing how one might like to interpret terrorist pronouncements.

It's amazing to me that you can pronounce certain behavior as inexcusable and berate Falwell for doing exactly the same thing. It all goes back to what you are willing to
call good and what you see as evil.