I am not sure if characterizing the Muslim fundamentalist?s attitude as hate is entirely correct. (at least as a primary basis of motivation). While it is certainly there, there is a much stronger element of divinely inspired self-righteousness that has to be considered. How to change the absolute and dispassionate conviction of being morally and spiritually correct (that drives the hate and violence) is a conundrum that remains un-answered.

When a pacific response to something like the WTC attack is seen by the attackers as both a sign of weakness and as a validation of their belief in the moral and spiritual decay and decadence of America , then Dr. Kings? somewhat two-dimensional solution is unsatisfying as any kind of answer.

We may well be in a ?damned if you do, damned if you don?t? quagmire. At a minimum, we?re up to our arse in mud already. As such, we need to proceed carefully. At what point do we say: No more! Clearly we have a clash of multiple values: religious, ethnic, economic, cultural and historic. Some (perhaps many) of which are mutually exclusive. Reducing the complex issues to a Kings mantra may be emotionally soothing but seems realistically overly simplistic. What values, if any, should we be unwilling to compromise on? Do we pursue non-violence to the exclusion of all other principles? Is it enough that we hold out violence as a last, regrettable, resort to defend those values that are basic?

Regards

John