Classy, the thing you miss in your idiocy on this one, is that yes, the people who are emotional over a loss can be less than rational in assigning blame.
That's not traditional bigotry - the learning to hate a group for irrational reasons.
Imagine that black student that was the first to enroll in 'Ol Miss later had a few members of the local KKK ambush and kill him.
Might his family have 'blamed whites', generalized the fault to 'white people', made generalizations about whites, said no more of their family is going to live with whites?
Of course they might have. (And they'd have a lot stronger case where support for segregation was a lot higher than Muslim support for Al Queda was.)
And people would see it for what it was, the emotion for losing their family member allowing an irrational view - blaming all white people as guilty - to affect them.
When we see people cheer the victims of a crime able to embrace the innocent people the criminals come from, it's cheering the victory of a more rational view.
There was a woman who with the best of the intent but mistakenly identified a black man as having been her rapist and he was in prison 15 years until he was exonerated and released. He had every reason to hate her for his loss at her fault, and the system, but people cheered him for not doing that, and their becoming close friends. Who could ask him to do that, but he did.
For most Americans, Muslims are 'those people', not 'us humans', and it's perfectly human for the irrational blame for all Muslims to happen for losing someone on 9/11.
That doesn't make it right.
Most of the opponents to the Mosque near ground zero did not lose a family member on 9/11. They have even less reason for their outrage to 'spill over'.
Ultimately, that misplaced 'outrage' is wrong, especially when it carries over to actions based on it of new discrimination.
The fact they 'feel' the hate isn't reason for the law to agree with their hate.
We have some sympathy and cut some slack for a family member who lashes out wrongly at a group. 'How sad, but let them be.'
Not so much for others, and less so for the law.
As I've explained, the hate is just what Al ueda was counting on as the reaction, as you play into their hands, because misguided hate will drive those targeted to them.
You don't understand bigotry, which isn't as surprising as it sounds. Being in a group that has been the victims of bigotry doesn't make you immune to be a bigot.
If anything, sometimes the victims of bigotry turn out to copy their oppressors if given the chance, it's what they've learned, not unlike how the molested become molesters.
That's not traditional bigotry - the learning to hate a group for irrational reasons.
Imagine that black student that was the first to enroll in 'Ol Miss later had a few members of the local KKK ambush and kill him.
Might his family have 'blamed whites', generalized the fault to 'white people', made generalizations about whites, said no more of their family is going to live with whites?
Of course they might have. (And they'd have a lot stronger case where support for segregation was a lot higher than Muslim support for Al Queda was.)
And people would see it for what it was, the emotion for losing their family member allowing an irrational view - blaming all white people as guilty - to affect them.
When we see people cheer the victims of a crime able to embrace the innocent people the criminals come from, it's cheering the victory of a more rational view.
There was a woman who with the best of the intent but mistakenly identified a black man as having been her rapist and he was in prison 15 years until he was exonerated and released. He had every reason to hate her for his loss at her fault, and the system, but people cheered him for not doing that, and their becoming close friends. Who could ask him to do that, but he did.
For most Americans, Muslims are 'those people', not 'us humans', and it's perfectly human for the irrational blame for all Muslims to happen for losing someone on 9/11.
That doesn't make it right.
Most of the opponents to the Mosque near ground zero did not lose a family member on 9/11. They have even less reason for their outrage to 'spill over'.
Ultimately, that misplaced 'outrage' is wrong, especially when it carries over to actions based on it of new discrimination.
The fact they 'feel' the hate isn't reason for the law to agree with their hate.
We have some sympathy and cut some slack for a family member who lashes out wrongly at a group. 'How sad, but let them be.'
Not so much for others, and less so for the law.
As I've explained, the hate is just what Al ueda was counting on as the reaction, as you play into their hands, because misguided hate will drive those targeted to them.
You don't understand bigotry, which isn't as surprising as it sounds. Being in a group that has been the victims of bigotry doesn't make you immune to be a bigot.
If anything, sometimes the victims of bigotry turn out to copy their oppressors if given the chance, it's what they've learned, not unlike how the molested become molesters.