There was no assumption about motivation in Lin Zi Quan's letter to the editor. The Burmese monks in question were "motivated" to take hostages and set cars on fire, which is an overt act of aggression.

This is clearly not an "assumption", but a stated fact.

If Dionys Murphy wishes to debate the merit, or the lack thereof in regard to such actions by members of the Sangha, it might be wise for him to do so from within the dialectics of Buddhist debate, for he not only demonstrated fallacious logical reasoning and presented a meaningless and incoherent argument, but in the end he also failed to understand Lin Zi Quan's question, "Who sees?"

There can be no practice of the Dharma without the practice of virtue and no amount of expedient means will ever change that. One who does not understand this is likewise one who does not "see".