Defining Terrorism

Joshua Fenio std3rr at
Wed Jun 26 13:53:46 MDT 2013

On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Kyle Waters <unum at> wrote:

> I want to go the opposite direction with this. Keep praying. You arguments
> are identical to Timothy McVeigh's and Terry Nicohls. Keep in mind they are
> now in a federal penitentiary and will not be leaving.  They too thought
> the government had been taken over by people bent on prosecuting
> Christians.


>  So they decided they needed to act, to strike back at the federal
> government before it was too late.  So they blew up a bunch of little
> children.  Don't do that.  Serious don't do that.

It's cognitive dissonance.  He's either a coward or he doesn't truly
believe that Obama is a secret socialist Muslim intent on taking over the
country with Muslim spies, or whatever.

You see the same thing with hardline pro-lifers.  They equate a fetus or
embryo with a baby, and call abortion doctors murderers.  But here's the
thing: their actions prove that they are either cowardly or don't truly
believe that a fetus is equatable with say, a 4 month old baby.  Do they
support the death penalty for abortion doctors or women who choose to have
an abortion? Most don't.  Would they support the death penalty if those
same doctors or women beat a 4 month old baby to death?  Most would.
 There's the dissonance.

And most pro-lifers actually have the audacity to call people like John
Salvi, James Kopp, and Scott Roeder insane.  But these guys, who killed
abortion doctors, were just taking the hardline pro-lifer's beliefs to the
rational next step.

I mean, I don't know about you guys, but if I heard there was a clinic down
the street that was killing 4 month old babies by the thousands every year,
I wouldn't stand outside with a sign chanting.  I'd go in and wreck shop!
And I'd presume people would say that, although my actions were extreme,
they were still _rational_.

And that's why people who claim abortion doctors are "baby murderers" know
in their hearts that a fetus is not a baby.  Even though they claim it is,
their action (or inaction) displays the cognitive dissonance in their

It's the same thing with people who claim "Obama is Satan", or "Obama has
subverted the entire government for his socialist muslim agenda", or
what-have-you.  If someone claiming that attempted to attack the federal
government or Obama, they'd be labeled as insane by the people who
supposedly hold the same beliefs.  Even though if you think Obama is an
agent of Satan, actively taking aggressive action and his "sham government"
would be rational.

You could literally explain this 100 different times to Keith, but after a
faint feeling of discomfort, he'll simply arrange the rationale in his mind
to excuse the dissonance.  It's intriguing, sure, but don't think you're
going to change his mind.

McVeigh and Keith may hold similar beliefs, but at least McVeigh was
staunch in his beliefs and took action.  They're both insane, but you can't
call McVeigh a coward.

addendum: personally, I think the Ruby Ridge and Waco instances were almost
solely the fault of the U.S. government, but I don't feel like getting into
that argument right now.

More information about the PLUG mailing list