I read with interest the letter from Rep. Wesselhöft ("A call for nonviolent civil disobedience") in your Aug. 25 issue. I weighed his arguments as carefully as I could, and re-read the letter to be certain of its intent.
Unfortunately, Rep. Wesselhöft's logic is flawed in several key areas, but let's focus on one: If one sincerely wishes to call for nonviolent civil disobedience, one must be willing to speak the language of nonviolence, and renounce the use of " and language of " violence.
Rep. Wesselhöft's use of violent rhetoric ("this ill-advised dagger in our soul," "a direct assault on our honor" and his use of the terms "terrorists," "radical" and "Muslim triumphalism" belie his stated intentions and reveal the true nature of his letter.
Rep. Wesselhöft would be well-advised to read the words of Mohandas K. Gandhi and the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. before making such a call again. Clearly, he needs to gain a clearer idea of what "nonviolent, civil disobedience" is before calling for something he does not yet fully comprehend.