Consider the person who writes this in the wake of the Fort Hood massacre:
Now imagine the same paragraph rewritten to feature anti-abortion Evangelical zealots [who target abortion providers for murder]:
I have not written about Fort Hood because the torrent of words so far has not facilitated understanding and guided sensible future policy--it has simply reiterated the simplistic mirror positions of opposing political camps.
Fort Hood was lone-wolf domestic terrorism.
So was the assassination of Doctor George Tiller.
Both killers spawned from a religious culture whose edges are tinged with the dangerous extremism, whose uncensored voice is the unfortunate but absolutely necessary pre-condition of a free society.
Go back and read the first paragraph, which tells you that our fears will lead us to cower behind metal detectors while burying our convictions that the Bill of Rights is essential, not simply preferred, in a free society.
Robert Heinlein often said that you could not coerce free people, only kill them.
Part of me is glad that he is no longer alive to see the cowards taking over.
The Muslims in this country have to cooperate with law enforcement to identify the jihadists among us, so we can be protected from them. Otherwise, at some point, the threat of spontaneously-arising jihadists from the Muslim community will convince us that we need Muslims to pass through metal detectors or otherwise be made secure from them.
Now imagine the same paragraph rewritten to feature anti-abortion Evangelical zealots [who target abortion providers for murder]:
The Evangelicals in this country have to cooperate with law enforcement to identify the anti-abortion zealots among us, so we can be protected from them. Otherwise, at some point, the threat of spontaneously-arising zealot assassins from the Evangelical community will convince us that we need Evengelicals to pass through metal detectors or otherwise be made secure from them.
I have not written about Fort Hood because the torrent of words so far has not facilitated understanding and guided sensible future policy--it has simply reiterated the simplistic mirror positions of opposing political camps.
Fort Hood was lone-wolf domestic terrorism.
So was the assassination of Doctor George Tiller.
Both killers spawned from a religious culture whose edges are tinged with the dangerous extremism, whose uncensored voice is the unfortunate but absolutely necessary pre-condition of a free society.
Go back and read the first paragraph, which tells you that our fears will lead us to cower behind metal detectors while burying our convictions that the Bill of Rights is essential, not simply preferred, in a free society.
Robert Heinlein often said that you could not coerce free people, only kill them.
Part of me is glad that he is no longer alive to see the cowards taking over.
Comments
There's nothing to show that the Ft. Hood murders were directly tied to and supported by a larger structure of terrorism.
I suspect that the psychological reality in this case is more complicated than just he was motivated by his religious values. It probably has more to do w/ what he was inclined to do under the circumstances in any case and his religious values merely provided further sanction ex post facto. Nothing provides sanction for a person's latent misanthropy more than divine approval and Islam, as history has shown amply, hardly has a monopoly on that.
Really? This same exact statement could be made about almost EVERY religious organization/sect/denomination. Just change the West to East, South, etc.
Can we stop blaming entire groups of millions of citizens when one person goes on a killing spree?
He sounds like a disgrace to the term "Libertarian."
ABC has reported today that the US government knew that Hasan had attempted to contact al Qaeda months ago. Even so, it is suspected that "Hasan was in contact with the former Imam of a mosque in Falls Church, Virginia, who now operates out of Yemen. Anwar al Awlaki, an American, runs an English language website that advocates worldwide jihad, and overnight called Major Hasan a hero and a man of conscience who did the right thing." (Link.)
It seems both Roeder and Hasan had at least some external ties and at least motivations; however, as noted, Roeder's wasn't explicitly anti-abortion (especially not in a leadership role), while it appears Hasan's actions were indeed tied to and supported by a larger structure of radical Islam.
Not really. With the exception of Judaism, there are no legitimate religious groups of the West that advocate a violent form of jihad. Christianity, in its many divisions and denominations, seeks to convert, but not to destroy. That so-called Christians did in the past is simply a reflection on their hypocrisy, not on the teachings of Christ. For the most part, the Western world wants to live in peace, with the exception of racist organizations, which are hardly a part of the mainstream. Radical Islam's very definition of peace depends on the complete eradication of the "infidel".