This response is dedicated to John Diffenderfer’s article “Why America is set to lose WWIII to the evil of Islam.” May I first point out to Mr. Diffenderfer that the excessive use of ad hominem is not an appropriate way to present his case against Ron Paul. Adorning Dr. Paul with degrading terms such as ‘moron’, ‘idiot’, and ‘ignorant’ serves only as emotional manipulation (ironically a tactic readily employed by the same terrorist groups and religious extremists he speaks out against) and not as an acceptable form of logical argumentation. Secondly, I would like to briefly analyze one major point of Mr. Diffenderfer’s argument and a dangerous and unacceptable conclusion which may be drawn from his article.

Mr. Diffenderfer’s point is that Muslim nations hate us and wish our destruction because the tenets of their religion somehow spawn more killers per capita than any other religion. Where is his data for that? Or is that just emotional puppeteering as well? How can he say that Islam produces more maniacal killers when we dwell in a state, country, nation, continent, and world full of them? They come from all walks of life. Why do we see the Muslim ones at the foreground? Because they’ve targeted us! Why have they targeted us? Not because their doctrines are inherently belligerent and violent, but because we’ve provoked them to it! One can see the tenets of Islam are very peaceful if he/she takes the time to study them instead of employing brash and uninformed generalization. Rather, it is human perversion coupled with the selfish abuse of power that is the true cause of murder and hate.

If the nature of Islam was to attack anything that wasn’t Muslim, why would they target a nation halfway across the world that is supremely more powerful? Why not focus on closer, weaker nations such as the Baltic countries in order to release their frothing rabid fury and bloodlust? They don’t do it because the United States has imposed itself in their affairs constantly and often unwarrantedly. We’ve given them more reason to attack us than smaller nations in closer proximity. The core of the matter is that human nature (especially when provoked) is responsible for the production of psychopathic killers, not any one group of people or religion.

John, anyone has the potential to become a genocidal maniac, but I would argue that the soil is most fertile for such production where emotional cataracts and ethnocentrism abound. Don’t believe me? You say that Muslims hate America and posit, “that has always been the case and it will continue to be so until either the destruction of the United States or the decimation of Islam. Personally, I prefer the latter opinion.” So your solution to the problem of how should we deal with mass murderers is: murder them en masse. Your flawed reasoning is blatant: you are adhering to principles you have denounced; you are advocating the destruction of a philosophy via the utilization of that same philosophy, and that is a gross logical/moral fallacy.

Space does not permit me to comment on his dubious historical analysis of Islamic/Western relations, but I want John to heed two things which I have shown him: 1) how to write an argument without mercilessly slandering his opponent and entire people groups, and 2) the need for him to exercise caution lest he should become like the very people he hates, because he is dangerously close.