Replies

From the article: In the case of the American right, it is the free path of the American forefathers and as for the Islamic fundamentalists it is the pure Islamic society, which lives by Sharia law to the last letter ruled by a Khalif and follows the Wahhabite sect, and both groups are quite willing to sacrifice innocent lives in order to achieve their aim.

Both groups??? True, thousands of Islamic fundamentalists have thought nothing of sacrificing innocent lives all around the world in order to achieve their goals. But, are we supposed to believe the American Right equally embraces the slaughter of innocents the way Islamic terrorists do based solely on the actions of one man: Timothy McVeigh? I don't think so!

Are American militia members infiltrating countries in the Middle East and flying planes into buildings located in Saudi Arabia and Iran? I don't think so!

Is the author of this article trying to say that since there's evidence that Islamic fundamentalists may have worked with Timothy McVeigh in the Oklahoma bombing that then surely American militia members must have worked with Atta and his gang to help them pull off the WTC and Pentagon attacks? What a load of cr@p!

Last I heard, McVeigh tried to join a militia group and got thrown out on his butt. How quaint that the author of this piece lumps the militia, the American Right, the NRA & gun owners into one menacing group. (Are you sure Hillary didn't write this?) The author seems to do a lot of this actually: sloppily lumping people into the same category. Let's see how this works: Islamic fundamentalists who kill innocents are terrorists. McVeigh did the same so he's a terrorist. (No problem so far. But then...) McVeigh was a Right-Winger so Right-Wingers are terrorists. Right-Wingers like guns so gun owners are terrorists. (So, by this thinking if it can be proven that people who like cookies tend to like guns, then people who eat cookies are terrorists? Oh, OK.)

Now, all we need is a van full of Israelis lurking in the shadows and we'll have a perfect Muslim fairy tale. Oops, wait a minute...

I think you summed it up pretty well. I saw "Iranian" in the header, but it took the author almost the whole article to spill the beans, he was one. I loved the reference to my terrorist leanings. This from an Iranian?

This is why I posted the thread.

Of course, with quotes like the following from Salon.com, (supposedly used as a reference)..you can see from where the inference is drawn:

"There is a common ideological thread that runs from Timothy McVeigh to bedrock Republicanism, and the shared emotional leitmotif of that ideology is anger. What distinguishes America's worst domestic terrorist from Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay and George W. Bush is the intensity of that anger"

You can tell Hillary didn't write it. She would have lumped Limbaugh into the category too.

How quaint that the author of this piece lumps the militia, the American Right, the NRA & gun owners into one menacing group. (Are you sure Hillary didn't write this?)