Replies

Here's another from his essay:

"Hence, it can be concluded that ravings carried by the "news" media since September 11 have contained at least one grain of truth: The peoples of the Mideast "aren't like" Americans, not least because they don't "value life' in the same way. By this, it should be understood that Middle-Easterners, unlike Americans, have no history of exterminating others purely for profit, or on the basis of racial animus. Thus, we can appreciate the fact that they value life – all lives, not just their own – far more highly than do their U.S. counterparts."

I've been to ogrish and viewed videos of beheadings. He's wrong about them valuing "all lives, not just their own - far more highly than do their U.S. counterparts."

Yes he is wrong about much. Humans everywhere as groups wage war for profit. That is the point of war, to secure land, influence, trade, security or whatever.

No one fights a war with the goal of loosing something of value.

Plus the people there are very cruel and hard hearted. As evidenced by the dull knife beheadings. Hammarabi actually warns us of this in his law code.

I would say the US values life more than the middle east, but I think that we do value our enemies lives in about the same contempt.

My whole point of being annoying about this is that his essay points out a truth of our existence on this planet. That groups of humans struggle for dominance and that is the way it has to be.

We all resent it (yes even Bin Laden himself). Wish there could be peace, but we know our destiny lies in War. And we know not how to change it.

I am of the opinion that truth such as that should probably be left unsaid, and even when it is studied only in an academic setting. But this is at odds with my belief in free speech.

So I am perplexed.