perfidy

Katzman really does, or doesn't really think about it.

Why is it that any attempt to understand the mindset of these people is automatically labelled pro-terrorist sympathizing? I don't know anything about this particular case, so I am generalizing somewhat.

The first order of business in defeating an enemy is understanding him, and understanding his motivations.

If a man is without hope, full of anger, fueled by religious fire, I can see where suicide bombing is something that would be a consideration. Right now I don't think it's something I could possibly ever do, personally, but I think I understand the objective factors that would lead to it.

Here's what really bothers me about such knee-jerk "you're a terrorist too" responses. We all sit here living with our shiny veneer of civilization, working hard at our information technology jobs, driving our SUVs, and cluck-clucking at the foibles of those crazy foreigners from the televised comfort of our suburban living rooms. If you're someone surrounded by that kind of comfort and you pass judgement on someone else because terrorism is "inconceivable", you're forgetting one thing:

You don't know what you'd do if you were in the same situation. We all want to believe that we wouldn't do it. It's inhuman, it's inconceivable, it's abhorrent. Not a chance.

So what could push you over the edge? What within your life could happen that would make you a little crazy, make you lose the civilized veneer? What if that happened; a son or daughter lost, and your anger became uncontrollable?

From my office, it could never go that far. I just don't think I have it in me. But I'm not going to pass judgement on those who try to understand, when doing so means pretending that I know my true self, when faced with the same situation.