<p>I am afraid that those are poor analogies. Little is known about the PA shooter but religious hatred is doubtful. I am not sure what religious hat you’d place on Breivik’s head. </p>
<p>Deluded or not, fanaticism appears to be central to the actions of the criminal in Sydney. Religion and fanaticism are not interchangeable terms. </p>
<p>I agree that romanigypsyeyes’ analogy is not accurate. In my view, anyone who kills innocent people is “crazy” or not mentally healthy. So, yes, those two killers have that in common. But there is a big difference otherwise. The guy in PA killed his relatives. The guy in Sydney killed random people and he used his fanaticism as part of the act. For example, the holding up of the religious flag and demanding an ISIS flag. He also had a history that includes pleading guilty for something to do with political fanaticism (the letter writing anecdote). This wasn’t a typical murder by a crazy person (though he’s that too), but it included fanaticism as part of the act and motivation. Now, if you want to compare that the Sydney guy allegedly killed his ex-wife and so did the PA guy, that one act has similarities and is less religiously and politically motivated.</p>
<p>
Gimme a break. This guy made his hostages hold up the black islamicist flag in the café window, not the flag of the kiwi All Blacks.</p>
<p>David Koresh of the Branch Davidivians was a Christian nutjob hellbent on destruction. </p>
<p>Shaking my head in disbelief at the scene in Pakistan… </p>
<p>
Not everyone who is Muslim is Arab. It’s really important to understand the differences among adherents of Islam, both ethnically and theologically. Iranians are not Arab at all, although they are often Muslims.</p>
<p>The difference between a violent crazy person of whatever religion is the absence of political motivation. The animals who massacred school children in Pakistan aren’t crazy, although they are monsters. They were promoting a political agenda. If you look at that way, you can ask yourself “was the action rational in furtherance of the perpetrator’s goal?” and if the answer is yes, then not crazy. The guy in Australia may or may not have been crazy, it’s too soon to tell. He may have been working toward a political motivation, but it’s just as likely he was a psycho perv whose psyche was formed in Islam. David Koresh was, I think, a garden variety crazy who found followers, like Jim Jones. I don’t think either of them truly had political goals. I think they wanted to create a world for themselves there they had available to them every perversion that their sick minds could conjure. There are, however, many Islamists (and I do not say Muslim because calling Islamists Muslims is an affront to every Muslim) who really, truly, sincerely do want to establish a universal Islamic state in their vision and believe themselves to be soldiers fighting a war to make that happen. Until well-meaning people come to understand that there are a lot of people who believe themselves to be at war with us and who see no tactic as off limits, more innocents will die – and most will be Muslims. Trying to pretend these things away harms no one else so much as Muslim people in the world. Sometimes good intentions are very harmful things.</p>
<p>The guy in PA who killed the cop and then was on the run for weeks had political motivations in the broadest sense. </p>
<p>These are the items the police found that he had abandoned:</p>
<p>“an AK-47-style assault rifle and ammunition, and two pipe bombs that were functional and capable of causing significant damage.”</p>
<p><a href=“Accused cop killer captured after weeks-long manhunt”>http://nypost.com/2014/10/30/accused-cop-killer-captured-after-weeks-long-manhunt/</a></p>
<p>He was charged with terrorism after he was apprehended. </p>
<p>As for the guy in Sydney - he was obviously a lone wolf - not that it diminishes what he did at all. I think this was a suicide by cop. I also don’t think he was mentally ill - just a mean, horrible, violent person. I also think he was a ISIS/ISIL sympathizer, but the reason he did what he did yesterday is that he knew it would lead to being killed by the cops. </p>
<p>I don’t know what to believe other than the killer of the Pennsylvania state trooper, yesterday’s ex-marine, and the wannabe cleric in Sydney are (were) all madmen, in the classic sense of the word. Armed and homicidal madmen.</p>
<p>Aren’t these heinous acts committed all over by individuals or groups whose motivation is rooted in a belief system that is inherently intolerant? Sprinkling a few instances of god, love and compassion into a set of verses that is predominantly satanic in nature will sanitize it, right? I agree with @xiggi; religion and fanaticism are indeed inseparable.</p>
<p>*
Shaking my head in disbelief at the scene in Pakistan…
*</p>
<p>So sad. </p>
<p>Very sad.</p>
<p>I feel that Pakistan’s military establishment and ISI in particular is responsible for the current situation. As long as they remain in power Pakistan will continue to be a failed state. They are the biggest sponsors of terrorism in the world. As long as Pakistanis allow themselves to be ruled by the military there is no hope for them. </p>
<p>It is time for Pakistanis to forget about annexing Kashmir and stop viewing India as the enemy. It is this fixation that helps the military and ISI stay in power. It is unfortunate that west and US in particular look the other way when Pakistan sponsored terrorism causes much destruction and loss of life in India - an inherently tolerant society.</p>