The Trojan Horse - Comments

I posted my commentary "The Trojan Horse" on August 6, 2011. Those who may want to re-read it can find it by clicking on the title above.

I received a concise comment from Pam Tisza who wrote:

Probably should not reply this morning because I am so disturbed by the loss of 38 of our young people in that foolish war in Afghanistan. Anyway, the polls show that 36 per cent (I think that is correct) of people do not approve of Obama's handling of the debt crisis. I think that is pretty much his liberal base--and Krugman speaks for that base. I am old enough to remember the last bad depression from Mt. Hoover, and I see it all happening over again.

Which prompted a rather long response from me that I want to share with my readers:

The poll figures are 48% disapproval of Obama's handling of the debt crisis and 71% disapproval of the GOPs approach. 48% is hardly the base. It undoubtedly includes those who think that he compromised too little, and those who think he compromised too much, with the vast majority not really having any opinion, except a general feeling that all must be to blame.

What I am trying to accomplish, and I am not sure I am succeeding, even with the relatively small audience that I have, is for people to get the facts before forming opinions. Nobody seems to care about the facts. It is as though all approach the issues of the day with, "I have made up my mind, don't bother me with the facts.”

This is something I have railed about for a long time against the Right, but now I find the Left is no longer interested in the facts either. Obama has been criticized for caving in to avoid a shutdown of the government. I have searched the media - I cannot find any description of what was conceded to avoid the shutdown. Some Right Wing sources have been grumbling that the GOP got nothing, that they caved completely and settled for bookkeeping gimmicks, but nowhere can I find what if anything Obama conceded. But the left criticizes that he gave up too much and nobody even attempts to get the facts, or if they have them they aren't sharing them with the public.

Now in connection with the debt ceiling compromise, I searched the New York Times and the Washington Post pages and found almost nothing on what the details of the compromise were. I finally found a good summary in CNN Money and the Wall Street Journal, but the facts are entirely at variance from what is represented in Krugman's and other "liberal" columns and in the e-mails I got from liberal organizations the facts are completely misrepresented. This is what I was trying to get across in my last blog. I am not sure anyone is hearing me.

All I am urging is Facts First, then opinions based on those facts. Krugman and the others are blatantly misrepresenting the facts. I am not sure whether they speak for the base, or are leading the base, or rather misleading the base.

You say you are old enough to remember the great depression and I see that at 88 you are indeed old enough. I came to the US in 1939, well past the worst of it, but I have read enough about it and seen enough documentaries, that I think I am as familiar with it as anyone. But there is no comparison between that and what we are experiencing now. Now we have an unemployment rate or 9.1%. In 1933 we had an unemployment rate of 37%. It is often said that we didn't get out of the depression until the war got us out of it, but by 1940 the unemployment rate was 13.9%, far worse than we have now, but a hell of an improvement over 37% which is what the Roosevelt Administration inherited. See my commentary on my blog entitled: "Roosevelt and the Great Depression."

What I am trying to get across is that the attacks are not only unfair, but they are based on either a misconception or a deliberate misrepresentation of the facts. What will it accomplish? It can only accomplish one thing, and that is to elect the real villains of the piece. Do we really want a President Bachman, or not much better a President Romney, who will run on a platform that he was a businessman who knows how to create jobs, but the dirty little secret will be that all he ever did was eliminate jobs.

All these Pundits seem to think that the President has the powers of a dictator. That he can sign an executive order that would have eliminated "Don't Ask Don't Tell.” That he could have simply invoked the 14th amendment and kept borrowing. They are not living in the real world. Aside from the fact that the Public (and the Left is not the public) would not have supported such high handed behavior, the chances are that the markets would have questioned this, and quite likely refused to lend, except at much higher interest rates, almost as great a disaster as going into default. The President lives in the real world, one in which no other President in American history has had to deal with. An opposition party that will resort to every tactic never before used. To filibuster everything that they don't like in the Senate, resulting in an unheard of situation where 59 to 41 in favor, defeats any bill, to using the debt ceiling as a weapon, which also has never been done before. Both Roosevelt and Johnson had huge majorities in both houses. Obama has had to work with slim margins. The legislative branch does count.

And almost from day one, the people who should have had his back, like Krugman, instead buried their dagger in it.

Now with all these obstacles has Obama accomplished anything? He has kept an incipient major depression form occurring and so instead of an unemployment rate of 37%, as we did in 1937, we have an unhappy 9.3%. Not good, but thank God.

Despite all the criticism of Obama from both the Right and the Left he has had more major achievements than any President before him since Lyndon Johnson.

We have universal Health Insurance. To be sure it is not single payer and does not have a public option. But it is more than any other President has been able to achieve, and to boot it is will lower the deficit according to the CBO, which Republicans cite if they like its findings, but ignore when it doesn't.

The left was very impatient with Obama because he was too slow to get rid of " Don't Ask, Don't tell," but he has now succeed where all his predecessors failed, and where the policy was adopted under the aegis of the last Democratic President, Bill Clinton. Under his Administration we have now in place some stern (yes, they could be sterner) bank regulations. If he had accomplished nothing else, this would be a brilliant record of achievement but he has accomplished much more.

$19 billion has been allocated to help implement an electronic medical record system.

On infrastructure the Department of Transportation has approved 2,500 highway projects.

A $2,500 tax credit to help offset the cost of tuition (among other expenses) for those seeking a college education has been enacted. Nearly five million families are expected to save $9 billion.

He saved the auto industry and untold millions of jobs in the process.

He allocated $2 billion in stimulus cash for advanced batteries systems. One high-ranking Hill aide called battery technology "the next big frontier" in the automotive world.

Set up an office of Urban Policy in the White House

Through the Recovery Act, DOJ secured $2 billion for Byrne Grants, which funds anti-gang and anti-gun task forces. The money, cut during the Bush years, should have massive ramifications on inner-city crime and violence.

Signed Schip legislation giving health coverage to millions of children by a bipartisan vote.

Pushed for and got unemployment insurance extended more than once on bipartisan votes.

The Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 put under federal protection more than two million acres of wilderness, thousands of miles of river and a host of national trails and parks.

He signed into law the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, designed to make it easier for workers to sue over gender-based pay discrimination.

He cut taxes for 95 percent of American workers in his stimulus package.

Tightened limits on interrogation tactics by Central Intelligence Agency officers.

Removed financing restrictions on groups that provide or discuss abortion overseas.

Granted California a waiver to regulate automobile tailpipe emissions linked to global warming.

The day after pill to stop unwanted pregnancies was approved by a new science based FDA.

Dealt effectively with a standoff with Somali Pirates.

Changed Cuba policy allowing Cuban Americans unlimited travel and money transfers to relatives there.

Signed an executive order reversing the ban on federal funding for embryonic-stem-cell research.

Restarted nuclear arms reduction talks with Russia.

Released the Bush Torture Memos, almost without redactions.

Announced a new policy on medical marijuana raids by the federal government.

EPA's adopted the position that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse-gas emissions pose a danger to the public's health and welfare.

Got rid of ineffective missile shield in Poland and Czech Republic.

Negotiated a treaty with the Russians to reduce the nuclear arsenal of both countries and managed to get it approved by the Senate.

Put Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan on the Supreme Court

Despite the rise of the Right and the Tea Party we are making more progress on DOMA than anyone could have hoped.

Oversaw the elimination of Osama Bin Laden, an objective that had totally escaped the Bush Administration.

Set a new standard, which will eventually require a 54.5-mpg fleet average (roughly 163 grams of CO2 per mile), will effectively double the average fuel economy of US vehicles by 2025.

Set new standards for commercial trucks to reduce by up to 20 percent fuel consumption and pollution emissions, beginning with 2014 models. Heavy-duty pickups and vans, will need to curb fuel use and emissions to achieve up to a 15 percent reduction by 2018. So-called "vocational vehicles," such as garbage trucks or fire engines, will have to cut emissions and fuel use by about 10 percent by 2018.

By executive order eliminated expensive copays for birth control.

And I am sure I missed many achievements.

Clinton did a terrific job in raising taxes early in his term, which together with an agreement with Fed Chairman Greenspan, to lower interest rates, brought on the eight most prosperous years in a very long time and wiped out the deficit. But he was lucky to get it passed. It passed by a tie vote in the Senate with the VP breaking the tie, which by the way shows that bringing prosperity is not a sure fire way to win a mid-term election.

Nevertheless, Clinton after losing the midterms, swung Right, employed that hired gun, Dick Morris, became famous for triangulation, and presided over, among many other things, the repeal of the Glass–Steagall Act, which probably was largely responsible for the bank crisis, presided over the abolition of Welfare, signed into law the "Don't ask, Don't Tell" and couldn't stop the enactment of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

Yet the base never savaged him. Somebody tell me why these Presidents are treated so differently?

Well, maybe because Obama unrealistically promised both to be a post-partisan and a transformational President, which are contradictory and impossible to achieve. But it should have been obvious that these are aspirational goals, not achievable ones.

Bigotry

“Have you no sense of decency... at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?“ Those who read this may or may not remember that these were the words spoken by the Special Counsel for the Army, Joseph N. Welch, in addressing Republican Senator, Joseph McCarthy. It led to his censure by the Senate and ultimately to the end of his career. The same words apply to the whole Republican Party today.

Only three months have passed since I wrote my “Swan Song.” I did not expect to return to the fray so soon, if ever.

But the latest outrage of the Republicans rankles so much, and tells us so much about that party, that I feel I am compelled to speak.

I know that in our society, it is the custom, to pretend that there is good and bad in both parties and that must be true. But increasingly, while I can find some warts in the Democratic Party, I have increasing difficulty in finding any redeeming qualities in that other party. In vain, I look for any voices of reason, any voices taking exception to the torrent of intolerance, hate, and lies that emanates from that flock of people. It just isn’t there.

Their constant modus operandi, and I have to admit it is good politics, is to appeal to fear, intolerance, and xenophobia. If there are any decent people left in that party, why don’t they speak out, why do they jump on the bandwagon and join the chorus.

Ever since 9/11 their surrogates, in the guise of the Heritage foundation, and others, have been trying to whip up hatred of Muslims. But until now the Republican Party has not joined in. In fact G.W. Bush urged that Muslims as a group or as a religion should not be blamed for the events of 9/11. But increasingly we have been hearing and reading, the question, “If Muslims are so opposed to terrorism, why don’t they speak out.”

But in fact, they have been speaking out, only our media doesn’t report it. According to Fareed Zakaria writing in Newsweek:

“In 2007 one of bin Laden's most prominent Saudi mentors, the preacher and scholar Salman al-Odah, wrote an open letter criticizing him for "fostering a culture of suicide bombings that has caused bloodshed and suffering, and brought ruin to entire Muslim communities and families." That same year Abdulaziz al ash-Sheikh, the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia, issued a fatwa prohibiting Saudis from engaging in jihad abroad and accused both bin Laden and Arab regimes of "transforming our youth into walking bombs to accomplish their own political and military aims." One of Al Qaeda's own top theorists, Abdul-Aziz el-Sherif, renounced its extremism, including the killing of civilians and the choosing of targets based on religion and nationality. Sherif—a longtime associate of Zawahiri who crafted what became known as Al Qaeda's guide to jihad—has called on militants to desist from terrorism, and authored a rebuttal of his former cohorts.

"Al-Azhar University in Cairo, the oldest and most prestigious school of Islamic learning, now routinely condemns jihadism. The Darul Uloom Deoband movement in India, home to the original radicalism that influenced Al Qaeda, has inveighed against suicide bombing since 2008. None of these groups or people have become pro-American or liberal, but they have become anti-jihadist.

“This might seem like an esoteric debate. But consider: the most important moderates to denounce militants have been the families of radicals. In the case of both the five young American Muslims from Virginia arrested in Pakistan last year and Christmas bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, parents were the ones to report their worries about their own children to the U.S. government—an act so stunning that it requires far more examination, and praise, than it has gotten."

But with every year that passes the Republicans use fear, xenophobia, and intolerance as weapons in pursuing their political and electoral objectives.

Now along comes an Imam who has spoken out again and again against terrorism and has sought dialogue with Christians and Jews. He has found an old building in lower Manhattan that is suitable for conversion and can be purchased at reasonable cost. And he wants to create a venue modeled after the YMCA, or the Young Men's and Young Women's Hebrew Association also known as the 92nd Street Y, which would be open to people of all faith. He aught to be applauded. But it is an opportunity to exploit the latent prejudice against all Muslims. And so the former Republican Speaker of the House, Newt Gingridge, and a likely candidate for the Republican Presidential nomination, said, it “would be like putting a Nazi sign next to the Holocaust museum." Thus he equates all Muslims with the Nazis. Richard Cohen writing in the Washington Post, points out, “ Nineteen so-called ’jihadists’ crashed four airplanes that day in 2001. This is 19 out of about 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, an infinitesimally tiny percentage indeed. And Gingrich goes on to say, “ there are no churches or synogogues (sic) in Saudi Arabia“ as though that is in any way relevant and rather ironic, since the Imam is extremely critical of Saudi Arabia and its form of Islam, Wahhabism.

But it doesn’t stop there. First they ranted about the proposed Center being two blocks from “Ground Zero“ then it became in the “Shadow of Ground Zero“ and finally Rick Lazio the Republican candidate for Governor of NY referred to it as “Ground Zero is the wrong place for a mosque”. See the transcript of PBS’ Newshour. It seems to have mysteriously moved. And then he goes on to imply that the center is being financed by terrorist groups and calls for an investigation as to where the financing is coming from. Would Mr. Lazio ask for an investigation of where the financing is coming from for a synagogue or a church? It is smear by innuendo. Then Mr. Lazio resorts to the fear factor. “The question here is really whether or not we should feel -- feel safe” Does he truly believe that the center is going to attack us?

And along comes Charles Krauthammer, that voice of the Right and the GOP who compares the Muslim Cultural Center to putting a Japanese Cultural Center at Pearl Harbor." To which Richard Cohen correctly points out, “But all of Japan attacked Pearl Harbor and declared war on the United States. It was not a rogue act, committed by 20 or so crazed samurai, but an attack by a nation.“

But it gets worse! Krauthammer now goes on to smear the Imam. “This is a man who has called U.S. policy "an accessory to the crime" of 9/11. Talk about taking a quote out of context. What Imam Faisal Abdur Rauf was talking about was that “after the Soviets pulled out, the Saudis, our best friends in the Arab world, our staunchest ally during the Gulf War, poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the newly-formed Taleban regime, and then felt that bin Laden and the Taliban were out of control. Bin Laden's faith is a strict, puritanical form of Islam called Washbasin, (sic) which was founded in the 18th century in Saudi Arabia, and is now that country's predominant ideology.“

He is critical of our close alliance with Saudi Arabia, which exports Wahhabism and feels that this is the form of Islam that creates terrorism and the US should not condone it.

I would suggest that many Americans of all faiths would agree with this and it hardly shows either that he is anti-American or that he holds sympathy to terrorists. Just the opposite.

But any distortion – any lie, in the cause of the smear and the feeding of a frenzy of intolerance.

And then along comes Abraham Foxman, of the Anti-Defamation League, and he gives cover to bigots and hate mongers with, "In our judgment, building an Islamic Center in the shadow of the World Trade Center will cause some victims more pain - unnecessarily - and that is not right." First of all no one knows how many “victims“ (presumably they mean the relatives of the victims) object to the Cultural Center (it may be a minority); and secondly, and most important, bigotry is not the right of anyone, whether victim or oppressor.

And what about the Muslim victims of 9/11 and beyond. The Daily Kos observes:

“According to one count over 60 Muslims died as a result of the 9/11 attack. But, evidently, in the RW mind those deaths do not count. Their death does not make Ground Zero hallowed ground, because, if they did, what would be the grounds for the uproar over the Islamic Center? Would anyone give it a second thought if a Jewish or Catholic community center was built where the Islamic center is planned?

“So...I am led to the conviction that this issue has nothing to do with real estate -- who builds what where -- but with the value of a human life and it seems that the right wing, the former party of family values, has decided that the life of an AMERICAN MUSLIMS and, by extension Muslim families, have no value.

“ If that is not sedition, will someone please explain it to me.“

Jannah.org estimates the number of Muslim victims at 500 to a 1000 and gives names not only of those victims but of Muslim victims of hate crimes.
And about.com tells the story of Salman Hamdani and other Muslims of which I quote only one:

“Imagine being the family of Salman Hamdani. The 23-year-old New York City police cadet was a part-time ambulance driver, incoming medical student, and devout Muslim. When he disappeared on September 11, law enforcement officials came to his family, seeking him for questioning in relation to the terrorist attacks. They allegedly believed he was somehow involved. His whereabouts were undetermined for over six months, until his remains were finally identified. He was found near the North Tower, with his EMT medical bag beside him, presumably doing everything he could to help those in need. His family could finally rest, knowing that he died the hero they always knew him to be.“

Why do we dishonor them?

In the words of Mayor Bloomberg:

“Whatever you may think of the proposed mosque and community center, lost in the heat of the debate has been a basic question: Should government attempt to deny private citizens the right to build a house of worship on private property based on their particular religion? That may happen in other countries, but we should never allow it to happen here.

“This nation was founded on the principle that the government must never choose between religions or favor one over another. The World Trade Center site will forever hold a special place in our city, in our hearts. But we would be untrue to the best part of ourselves and who we are as New Yorkers and Americans if we said no to a mosque in lower Manhattan.

“Let us not forget that Muslims were among those murdered on 9/11, and that our Muslim neighbors grieved with us as New Yorkers and as Americans. We would betray our values and play into our enemies' hands if we were to treat Muslims differently than anyone else. In fact, to cave to popular sentiment would be to hand a victory to the terrorists, and we should not stand for that.

"For that reason, I believe that this is an important test of the separation of church and state as we may see in our lifetimes, as important a test. And it is critically important that we get it right.

"On Sept. 11, 2001, thousands of first responders heroically rushed to the scene and saved tens of thousands of lives. More than 400 of those first responders did not make it out alive. In rushing into those burning buildings, not one of them asked, 'What God do you pray to?' (Bloomberg's voice cracks here a little as he gets choked up.) 'What beliefs do you hold?'

Republicans have clearly decided that fanning the public's fears of rampant jihadism and prejudice against Muslims continues to be a winning strategy.

Hate (A Rebuttal)

On February 15 I circulated what I considered to be a hate screed and denounced haters. I said among other things “They always want to get the group that the criminals came from which in this case would be Muslims. I also promised that “next time I will reproduce this screed again in full and rebut it with specific comments on each of its points.” In doing so I particularly want address the comments made by Dr. Joel Etra of Norwich, Conn. who said, “I did not see statements about Muslims in general rather about the deadly excesses of the criminal element.” So here goes! I will reproduce the screed with my comments on it in bold letters so they can easily be distinguished.

"Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we? Was it or was it not started by Islamic people - it was done by people of the islamic faith-this phraseology is clearly intended to tar the whole religion with the acts of the perpetrators - who brought it to our shores on September 11, 2001?

“Were people from all over the world, mostly Americans, not brutally murdered that day, in downtown Manhattan, across the Potomac from our nation's capitol and in a field in Pennsylvania? Yes, they were mostly Americans but there were a great many from other nationalities and religions among them including approximately 100 Muslims.

“Did nearly three thousand men, women and children die a horrible, burning or crushing death that day, or didn't they? - Indeed they did.

“And I'm supposed to care that a copy of the Koran was "desecrated" when an overworked American soldier kicked it or got it wet? - The desecration of a religious object is always an insult to all the members of that religion. I think that Christians would be very insulted if a Christian bible were spit on, stamped on or otherwise treated with disrespect. The Nazis when they started their persecution of the Jews first and foremost desecrated the Jewish holy book, the Torah, because they knew how painful it would be to members of that faith.

“Well, I don't. I don't care at all.

“I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11. - Here again the linkage is that since Osama Bin Laden is evil that until he repents we are justified in treating his religion with contempt.

“I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the Middle East start caring about the Holy Bible, the mere possession of which is a crime in Saudi Arabia - Saudi Arabia is an intolerant society – do we really want to copy them; and even if we wanted to retaliate against the Saudis do we really want to also insult the religion of 52 countries having a population of which a majority is Muslim. India, which has a majority of Hindus, has a minority of Muslims totaling174 million. Some of our most important allies, e.g. Pakistan are Muslim states and our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan are shedding their blood to try to make those Muslim countries into viable states. Muslims have been victims of Al Qaeda attacks, notably Pakistan, Indonesia, Jordan and many others. Turkey a Muslim country is a member of NATO. There are between 700,000 and 1.2 billion Muslims in the world. Between 1 and 6 million Muslims reside in the U.S. most live quiet law abiding lives and no American Muslim has been identified as being part of Al Qaeda but insults hurled at their religion helps to radicalize and helps recruitment everywhere.

“I'll care when Abu Muse al-Sarawak tells the world he is sorry for hacking off Nick Berg's head while Berg screamed through his gurgling slashed throat.

“I'll care when the cowardly so-called "insurgents" in Iraq come out and fight like men instead of disrespecting their own religion by hiding in mosques.

“I'll care when the mindless zealots who blow themselves up in search of nirvana care about the innocent children within range of their suicide bombs.

“I'll care when the American media stops pretending that their First Amendment liberties are somehow derived from international law instead of the United States Constitution's Bill of Rights. - What this has to do with insulting and desecrating a religious text is beyond me. But it is not the media that pays attention to International law. It is our government and the US Supreme Court. International law is binding on us all, often by treaty approved by the US Senate. But First Amendment liberties have never been and are not derived from international law. It should be noted, however, that in the declaration of independence there is a reference to “a decent respect to the opinions of mankind."

“In the meantime, when I hear a story about a brave marine roughing up an Iraqi terrorist to obtain information, know this: I don't care.

“When I see a fuzzy photo of a pile of naked Iraqi prisoners who have been humiliated in what amounts to a college-hazing incident, rest assured that I don't care. - It was hardly a college hazing incident. It was intended to humiliate and degrade.

“When I see a wounded terrorist get shot in the head when he is told not to move because he might be booby-trapped, you can take it to the bank that I don't care.

“When I hear that a prisoner, who was issued a Koran and a prayer mat, and fed "special" food that is paid for by my tax dollars, is complaining that his holy book is being "mishandled," you can absolutely believe in your heart of hearts that I don't care. - First the issue is not the prisoners complaint, but the insult to all members of that faith. Second none of these prisoners have ever been convicted of any crimes. In fact, they have never even been accused of any.

“And oh, by the way, I've noticed that sometimes it's spelled "Koran" and other times "Quran." Well, Jimmy Crack Corn and ---- you guessed it - - I don't care ! ! ! ! ! - Another way to insult the Muslim faith.

“If you agree with this viewpoint, pass this on to all your a-mail friends. Sooner or later, it'll get to the people responsible for this ridiculous behavior!

“If you don't agree, then by all means hit the delete button.

“Should you choose the latter, then please don't complain when more atrocities committed by radical Muslims happen here in our great country. - Whoa, if I don’t agree then I am responsible for any possible future acts of terror! This is hate directed not only against Muslims but against all those who don’t agree with her vision of a world, where we disrespect the faith of huge numbers of people; the second largest faith in the world.

First rule for a sane world! Do not disrespect other religions or their Holy Books or Holy Symbols.

Hate

I recently received a hate screed being circulated by e-mail. Rather than simply delete it I believe it is important that we are all aware of the type of poison being circulated. The polemic originated from a woman in Atlanta, Georgia. I will reproduce it below, followed by my general comments on it. Next time I will circulate it again with my specific comments on each point made. The polemic is reproduced below:

"Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we? Was it or was it not started by Islamic people who brought it to our shores on September 11, 2001?

“Were people from all over the world, mostly Americans, not brutally murdered that day, in downtown Manhattan, across the Potomac from our nation's capitol and in a field in Pennsylvania?

“Did nearly three thousand men, women and children die a horrible, burning or crushing death that day, or didn't they?

“And I'm supposed to care that a copy of the Koran was "desecrated" when an overworked American soldier kicked it or got it wet?

“Well, I don't. I don't care at all.

“I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11.

“I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the Middle East start caring about the Holy Bible, the mere possession of which is a crime in Saudi Arabia.

“I'll care when Abu Muse al-Sarawak tells the world he is sorry for hacking off Nick Berg's head while Berg screamed through his gurgling slashed throat.

“I'll care when the cowardly so-called "insurgents" in Iraq come out and fight like men instead of disrespecting their own religion by hiding in mosques.

“I'll care when the mindless zealots who blow themselves up in search of nirvana care about the innocent children within range of their suicide bombs.

“I'll care when the American media stops pretending that their First Amendment liberties are somehow derived from international law instead of the United States Constitution's Bill of Rights.

“In the meantime, when I hear a story about a brave marine roughing up an Iraqi terrorist to obtain information, know this: I don't care.

“When I see a fuzzy photo of a pile of naked Iraqi prisoners who have been humiliated in what amounts to a college-hazing incident, rest assured that I don't care.

“When I see a wounded terrorist get shot in the head when he is told not to move because he might be booby-trapped, you can take it to the bank that I don't care.

“When I hear that a prisoner, who was issued a Koran and a prayer mat, and fed "special" food that is paid for by my tax dollars, is complaining that his holy book is being "mishandled," you can absolutely believe in your heart of hearts that I don't care.

“And oh, by the way, I've noticed that sometimes it's spelled "Koran" and other times "Quran." Well, Jimmy Crack Corn and ---- you guessed it - - I don't care! ! ! ! !

“If you agree with this viewpoint, pass this on to all your e-mail friends. Sooner or later, it'll get to the people responsible for this ridiculous behavior!

“If you don't agree, then by all means hit the delete button.

“Should you choose the latter, then please don't complain when more atrocities committed by radical Muslims happen here in our great country.”

I am always fascinated by people who hate. What is there in them that makes them hate so? In this case the polemic was directed against Muslims but what I find fascinating is that people like this will always hate some group. These are the kind who blindly hated Japanese-Americans and provoked the panic that caused the internment of 120,000 American citizens during the Second World War to our everlasting shame. Yes, Japan had attacked us, but these American citizens had nothing to do with it, except that they shared a common ancestry.

It is the haters who are killing each other in Iraq. To them if some Sunnis blew up their Shiite mosque they will not seek out the perpetrators, but will hate and kill all Sunnis randomly. And then the haters among the Sunnis will not look for the killers of Sunnis, but they will kill Shiites randomly and innocent people on both sides of the religious divide suffer and die.

It is the haters who manage to always find reason to lump a whole ethnic group together for hate. Sometimes it is Jews and sometimes it is African-Americans. At one time we hated Chinese and barred them from immigrating. At one point the haters hated Catholics; they called them Papists and Jews were Christ killers.

When a crime is committed they can never focus on the individuals and their coconspirators who committed the crime and hunt them down and bring them to justice and dismantle their network. They always want to get the group that the criminals came from. These are the haters who supported the lynching of large numbers of African-Americans every time they thought that one of them had committed a crime.

Haters have never been a force for good, or justice, or for success in war, or in any other endeavor. God spare us from their poison.

Next time I will reproduce this screed again in full and rebut it with specific comments on each of its points. I find the fact that it was well written more disturbing because it suggests that the writer is not an ignorant person and yet the contents smack not only of hate but of ignorance.