I'm writing today because I am curious. Was Greg Horton's article titled "Okies and Odinism," page 11 in your Dec. 23, 2009, edition, supposed to be a research news article or an editorial? I ask because either way, it is confusing.
On one hand, there is obviously a fair amount of research that went into the article. On the other hand, I lost count of how many times he used the word "racist" or "supremacist." But then, starting off an article with a question about agendas goes a long way toward informing the reader that his research was tarnished with preconceived notions.
It is obvious that Aundrea Groom tried to convey to him the fact that Asatru uses runes that predate modern written language. Yet five paragraphs from the end of the article he writes, "White supremacist groups that are not neo-Nazi, including heathens and modern-day Vikings, also use the Nazi symbols, thereby increasing the confusion."
I might be so bold as to correct him by saying that Nazis used runes. Confusion is only increased when ignorant yahoos write about that which they do not know! The fact of the matter being, runes are seen as a gift of the gods (that far predates Christianity). Just because Hitler used them in no way makes them his.
We are talking about the Asatru ancestors, not third cousins' grandparents from 50-plus years ago. These symbols were created and used by the Norse people thousands of years before Hitler was even a fetus! Yet, Horton declares runes "Nazi symbols." It is examples like this, of misplaced blame, that lead good-hearted religious groups to suffer persecution for being associated with hate groups and gangs.
As editor, I would request that you speak with Horton about writing an apology for his lack of objective journalism.