Last name 1 Alejandra De La Torre John Kubler English 114A 9 September 2013 Exercise 1.

2: Critical Response Letter to Author Mr. David Gibson, I would like to comment about some issues I have about your article Does Religion Cause Terrorism? It's Complicated. This article as you remember begins by explaining how the incident in 9/11 wasnt caused by terrorism. It mentions that since that day experts have come up with theories for the role religion plays on global violence. I believe the link to religion and terrorism began way before 9/11. Revival of Religious Terrorism Begs for Broader U.S. Policy by Bruce Hoffman, one of the worlds leading expert on terrorism, mentioned many logos, or facts that begin way before 9/11. The incidents between religion and terrorism have been happening through all our lives even though we werent aware of it. For example, in 1992 bloodletting by Islamic extremists in Algeria claimed an estimated 75,000 lives. Another example is that in June 1996 religious militants opposed to the reigning al-Saud regime in Saudi Arabia perpetrate truck bombing of U.S. Air Force barracks in Dhahran, killing 19 people. In this article I also disagrees that religion is not the problem. It states, religion is one of many factors in the explosive brew of politics, culture and psychology that leads fanatics to target innocents -- and take their own lives in the process. How is religion not the problem, yet it is one of the factors thats stirs up cultural/ethnical differences. Because of religion, people feel the need to kill people that go against their God to make them happy. Meanwhile, they also kill themselves so they wont be punished. They do all of this and use God as an excuse because they wanted to please their God. How can religion not be a problem, yet most of the facts on terrorism deal with religious groups.

Last name 2 I believe religion is a cause of terrorism. Bruce Hoffmans article proved it to me with many facts and statistics. Hoffman is also a terrorism expert which makes his article more credible than others. Your article states otherwise yet it contains hardly any facts mostly pathos to relate to the audiences emotions. You have hardly any credibility to your article, which makes it hard for me to agree with your point of view.