Doug,

I have no difficulty with the fact that the guilty might claim to be Muslims, only with the erroneous deduction from that position that the Islamic religion is guilty in some way (I'm NOT accusing you of this at all): it is analagous to me believing that because a Catholic IRA member attacks and kills someone that, therefore, Christianity is somehow responsible. As I've said elsewhere, nobody (in the Western media) talks about the IRA (or the UDF, UVF, UDLA, Real IRA or any of the other similar organisations) in terms of 'radical Christianity' but it seems to be open season on Islam.

The point I was trying to make (rather unsuccessfully it appears!) was that many had decided that this crime was committed by some so-called 'Muslim' group without any evidence **whatsoever**, with no facts to back that assertion: I was trying to show that alternative scenarios, however improbable, could also be made with the same LIMITED amount of information. I was also complaining about the attachment of a religious label to terrorists and then the terrorists+religion to a location in the misty distance somewhere to the East....I was trying to separate the issue of religion (as some members of that religion will inevitably have been killed in NY) from the terrorism aspect. I was complaining that the guilty had "taken seeds of truth and planted fields of hate" and that the Western media seem intent on a full harvest.

Regards, etc.

Robert Ladyman

>Robert,
>
>>snip<
>
>If I may add a few thoughts to your 'vent'. <g>
>
>1. I believe in God and His love as demonstrated by the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, also called Christ. This is called Christianity or, originally 'the way'. And though there are many many confusing and often contradictory positions all calling themselves the same thing I am of the opinion that there is an historically accurate set of positions that are most consistent and accurate with what was originally intended. I assert that this set of positions may be rationally uncovered/learned by careful and reasonable processes that do not require an irrational 'leap' of faith. I mention this so you will know where I am starting in my thinking process. I also know that many will disagree with me.
>
>2. I believe that rational men do not automatically abandon their 'rationality' by believing in that which they cannot see. I also believe in atoms and electricity and most importantly, love. Can't 'see' that you know...
>
>3. Regardless of one's personal belief system, holding to those beliefs IMO in no way excuses one from being examined as to one's positions. For example, while the Posse Comitatis is allegedly a pro-God group it is obvious from their assertions that they are at least on the fringe if not outright nuts. <g> And yet they name the name of God.
>
>4. I think it is irrational for any one 'group' or individual to make determinations (judgements) of/on others based solely on their inclusion in any specific group. As you point out, it is irrational to 'judge' believers in Islam in the condemning sense simply because that is their faith. Just as it is irrational to judge (in a condemning sense) Americans simply because they live in America. Apparently though, this is exactly what these radical Muslims have done. They have taken it upon themselves to place themselves in the place of God in meteing out judgement. I'd suggest that only He will be perfectly and absolutely fair and equinanimous in His judgement. I am personally quite content to leave this kind of judgement in His hands. However, our Constitutionally constituted government requires a response fromits leaders in order for them to fullfill their oaths of office. Personal retribution is IMO better off surrendered to a corporate response in this case for the very
>reasons you state. That is, in order to avoid hate-based reactions as a sort of tit-for-tat to the hate-based provocations. I dare say that we are reacting here though and not precipitating the event.
>
>Ok.. Having said all of this let's ask a few questions.
>
>1. Over that last 25 years or so what 'group' has been statistically in the majority of those precipitating these types of events?
>
>2. When Barak offered Arafat everything that he (Mr. Arafat) had demanded with the sole exception of absolute control of the Temple Mount and Mr. Arafat turned him down would you consider it 'rational' or 'fair' or 'reasonable' on the part of the Palestinians?
>
>3. When Israel returned to the land the Arabs sold them some swampland. The Israelies drained the swamp, primarily by planting eucalyptus trees (very thirsty <g>) and when the land suddenly had value the Arabs wanted it back. Is this 'reasonable' or 'fair'?
>
>4. When you need to send your children to school in armored vehicles to keep them from being snipered would you consider it rational or irrational to want to defend yourself? Do you have children and do they face a daily assault on their personal safety like this?
>
>I mention these only to point out that your definition of 'rational' might be influenced by your emotional ties to your friends as mine might be tied to other issues. I suspect that neither is really entirely free from a certain amount of rationalizing, wouldn't you? <g>
>
>The facts are that radical Muslims have precipitated the current state of affairs - and I suspect for religious, though certainly not hate-free, purposes. If their faith, or their interpretation of their faith's tenent's has led them to this position and this position is quite outside of their faith's mainstream position I fully expect all 'true' believers in Islam to not only soundly condemn these actions but to take concrete steps in helping authorities in resolving this matter.
>
>Equally I expect those of other faith not to use this as an occasion for advancing their own positions other than perhaps an attempt to bring as much healing as possible.
>
>No matter what this is an extremely sad matter. There are literally hundreds of thousands of grief filled homes today. If these terrorists' goal was to awaken us out of a materialisticly-induced stupor I hope they have succeded. How they did what they did is unforgiveable and merits swift and sure retribution IMO.