DougR,

I understand what you are saying, and your point is certainly valid. There are no hard and fast rules that define evil once and for all, which is why people struggle (or if amoral, don't struggle at all) with these questions. I'm just trying to share my point of view with you, not win or be right about this.

My point of view is informed by what many people refer to as the "reasonable person" standard. In other words, a reasonable person would agree that the events of 9/11 were evil acts, or that the indiscriminate bombing the Israelis have been engaging in over the West Bank and Gaza in the past couple of years, are evil acts. As are the suicide bombings. I think reasonable people can agree on that.

That is the sort of thing I think reasonable people do agree on. There are always unreasonble people who will refuse to agree too though, as you pointed out about the perpetrators of 9/11 and their supporters. But that, in my mind, doesn't mean that evil is in the eye of the beholder, but that those people who don't see 9/11 as evil are unreasonable, regardless of what their reasons and justifications are for seeing 9/11 as an admirable, or even reasonable act.

It is a subtle difference, and I apologize if I'm not articulate enough to describe the difference in a way that can be easily understood. My failing with words, I guess.