Racial argument loses on at least 3 counts

Bret Nilles' guest column (“Racist injustice demands response,” April 27) says he is a commissioner on the Cedar Rapids Civil Rights Commission. I trust he was not speaking for the commission when he repeatedly attacked local writer Bill Strilich (“Racism evident on all sides,” April 20) and said little that made sense. Let's run it down, point by point.

Strilich's letter contends that the Reverends Jesse Jackson, Jeremiah Wright and Al Sharpton promote racial division. Nilles views these men as impartial civil rights leaders. In my opinion, these men are the equivalent of ambulance chasers who exist on racial division. I'll call this a draw.

Nilles' “straw man” argument that Strilich denies racism exists is simply untrue. Strilich contended that racism exists on all sides of the color spectrum. Strilich 1, Nilles 0.

Nilles imputes ignorance on Strilich's part regarding racial struggles in America. There was nothing in Strilich's letter regarding that. Another “straw man.” Strilich 2, Nilles 0.

Nilles contended that Strilich was wrong in attributing the murders of servicemen at Fort Hood to a religious war. Really? When the accused murderer screams “Allahu, Akbar” and shoots his fellow servicemen, that's not religious? Strilich 3, Nilles 0.

Three strikes and you're out, Mr. Nilles.

According to Mr. Nilles, it seems justice is all about race and religion. I'm white and Christian. Is there justice for me or must I convert to Islam, become black or both?

Ed Dolan

Central City