[scandium]

Originally Posted by Abraham

I am not saying that you excuse the perpetrators. What irritated me and made me react, perhaps overreact, is the fact that in the face of an attempted act of terror you reacted to the words of the Canadian P.M. by attacking him for talking about "us" and "them" and started to make nuances.

Of the dozen or so newspaper articles on this attempt I'd looked at, none had the quote from the PM. A few allocated a paragraph on the bottom half of their article to what the leader of the Cdn. Islamic Congress had to say. In the face of an attempted act of terror I had no reaction to the words of our PM because I had not seen those words - until AL posted that ridiculous "Little Green Footballs" article that accused the Cdn. Islamic Congress leader of blaming Canada. My reaction to this was to point out that it is utter BS and that I agreed with the Cdn. Islamic Congress leader as far as his point about rhetoric goes. Again, this goes to your "us" and "them" mentality that you could equate that with "attacking the PM" which is total nonsense.

If you see this kind of terrorism in the face, religiously motivated, totalitarian (no limits to political objectives or human targets) and only capable of destruction than you have to take a principle stand: this can't be condoned. As soon as you do that, you are in an "us versus them" situation whether you like it or not. And that line is very clear. No need for nuances here!

A strawman. Believe it or not I can see terrorism for what it is, not condone it, be completely opposed to it and yet still separate the acts of the few who practice it or encourage it from the many whose only crime was being born into a Muslim family and who have never and will never encourage or commit such an act.

Now the leader of the Canadian Islamic Congress - a racist and would be terrorist himself if we should believe his statements about Israeli civilians as legitimate targets - tried to nuance that line and make this into a Canadian non-Muslims and Canadian Muslims issue. His reasons seem obvious, he probably adheres the same ideology as the would-be terrorists. His tactics are also clear; attack the clear statement of his own P.M.; scare the Muslims into a minority and victimized role and try to divide the country along religious lines.

I read it the opposite way, that he was asking the PM not to make this into a Muslim vs non-Muslim issue. As to the rest of what you're saying, I have no idea what you're even basing that on other than obviously not the same remarks I had read earlier.

Terrorism is a black crime for me and I think I am smart enough to make a distinction between black and all the other colors of the spectre. In situations like this what's wrong with "us" and "them" as The Avon Lady said. I felt manipulated by your remarks into a group of people who are dangerously stupid to include every Canadian Muslim into the "them" group. I am not doing that. The issue at hand is whether the Canadian Muslims are doing that themselves. Seen in that light the remarks of the jeader of the Canadian Islamic Congres don't forebode much optimism.

What's wrong with your "them" is that it seems too often to include Muslims in general, except when as now you are being disengenous. What's wrong is that it has every appearance to me of being grounded firmly in bigotry against a very large group of people whose identity I don't see as defined by the acts of a few the way you do. You say you feel "manipulated" by my remarks into this, I say its because my remarks perhaps come a little closer to the truth than you are willing to admit to yourself.