Do you know D.C.?
Get our free newsletter to stay in the know about local D.C.
Re Eddie Dean’s silly article (“Alleged Killer, Proven Killer,” 11/22):
I’m going to presume that Dean is not an instantaneous creation from heaven, that he actually has a mommy and daddy, right? Maybe siblings? Maybe even cousins, aunts, uncles, more distant gene-pool associations? How would he have written this article if they had been shot by the Muslim snipers? Or would that have affected his “detachment”?
Maybe Paul Ebert has a reason to protect society from snipers and other predators in society, not just because it’s his job, hired into it for his qualifications? Perhaps Dean would rather have John Mohammad in charge of all decisions?
As I recall, the punishment for breaking the majority of Muslim/sharia rules happens to be death, usually by stoning or rooftop-tossing, occasionally wall-tumbling or head-chopping, leavened by the more rare amputation. Does Dean have problems with that? Perhaps the “cruel and unusual” part?
Maybe these are questions that Dean has difficulty answering. Maybe Dean has issues with the fact that a modern civilization is multifaceted, and one of the myriad responsibilities of a sufficiently advanced society is the protection of its members from savages, Muslim or not. I won’t mention the foiled plan to bomb the Vatican, killing all inhabitants, or the other various ways certain members of the Religion of Peace plans to kill all Jews, infidels, and pagans.
Response(s) from Dean are invited. Rational discussion preferred.
Best wishes for a happy and safe holiday season.
San Ramon, Calif.