<<They would have to face the grim and disturbing truth that there are people out there who relish the thought of pointlessly killing thousands of our fellow citizens, simply because they are our fellow citizens -- not for a political objective, or to achieve a military goal, but just because they see us as their enemy. >>
I remember this feeling from another time. I was in Newark the day MLK was shot. I went shopping in my mother's car, which didn't have a working radio, so I had no way to interpret the strange and edgy behavior of gathering black crowds along Springfield Avenue, my route home.
When I got home I found out what had happened. I found out that a white woman who had been driving my route had been killed by a sniper. I spent a very long time pondering hatred of me just because I was white.
Can't say that I ever ever came to think of blacks as my enemy, though. I don't think it was disrespectful of me to not hate them. I don't think it meant that I didn't consider them my equal. Quite the contrary.
Or misevaluate it, as the case may be.
Indeed back atcha.
<<It is almost as if we, as a nation, are entering into what psychologists call denial. >>
That's an interesting explanation, one with some superficial appeal. I don't think it holds water, though. The debate is not between a bear and no bear or between a bear and an earthquake but between a bear and a rat. I don't think anyone denies that there's a critter in the woods.
The way the Dems ignore the subject, though, sure seems to lend credence to the denial theory. I imagine, though, it's just that they don't see it as a good issue for them and don't want to focus on it.
That article was written by a true believer. You can tell from language such as " if rightly understood" and "This is the terrible truth revealed by 9/11. It was not an act of crazed loonies, unlikely to reoccur." It takes a true believer to find "terrible truth" and to derive a pattern from one occurrance.
When I responded to Mike, I wasn't trying to restart the bear argument, BTW. That's like arguing over whether there's a god or not. No one knows for sure or even has a preponderance of evidence so it's pointless. People will believe what they believe. I was just commenting because it is offputting to continuously read beliefs presented as facts. I'm careful to say that my notion of a rat rather than a bear is my opinion, even if I do find it compelling and obvious, and I like to see others similarly appreciative of the nature of facts and beliefs and opinions. |
