[lit-ideas] Re: Defending Offense.
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 23:40:41 -0800
I disagree with you here. Note that Geary says Bush is warring against the
Muslims. Bush has been careful to show that America wars not against
Muslims but against Militant Islam, the Islamists, the Terrorists. But the
Islamists themselves describe the situation as Mike does.
Note that he says we "beheaded" (clearly not true) 30,000 Muslims. He is
using a figure that blames America for the accidental deaths of civilians
caused by American action (about 8,000) plus the deaths caused by insurgents
and civil breakdown (22,000). This is an Islamist position as well. By
being there we cause those who oppose us to oppose us.
Geary says that not one Muslim would be in the streets if Bush hadn't waged
war against Muslims. Islamists attacked the U.S. during the Reagan, Bush
Sr, and Clinton administrations many times and we didn't respond but let
these attacks pass. Muslims didn't take our non-action as restraint but
cowardice and became bolder and bolder. This would be well known by anyone
reading speeches of Islamist leaders like Osama bin Laden. Secular leaders
like Saddam Hussein argued in the same manner. Restraint inspires increased
Islamist and rogue-state activity rather than the reverse, but the Islamist
party line is as Mike voices it, that our actions cause them to violently
act against us.
I'm not sure that Mike really believes this. He recently admitted that he
says things just to be offensive. Nevertheless we must take Mike as being
probably truly offensive and not just feigning.
Lawrence
-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of P.H.Lundbech
Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 11:05 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Defending Offense.
On Wed, 8 Feb 2006 22:38:22 -0800, "Lawrence Helm"
<lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>Leftists who support the party line of the Islamists, as you do,
Mr. Geary just posted "Defending Offense" which certainly is not
the party line of the islamists, quite the contrary actually. So
you much refer to his statement of a few facts about civilian
casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Now that's really offensive. Speaking the truth automatically
gets you labeled as leftist? I am SO offended! If I was a Muslim
... nah, forget it!
P. H. Lundbech
Odense, DK
are in a
>bizarre self-destructive situation. If those you defend were to become
>triumphant, you would be destroyed.
>
>
>
>You recently wrote a "let us reason together" note that I appreciated and I
>responded to, but you abandoned the project for reasons not disclosed and
>now indicate your preference for insults.
>
>
>
>Your project of seeking to offend is banal in the extreme. Any high-school
>drop out can do that by sticking a finger out his automobile window.
>
>
>
>Lawrence
>
>
>
> _____
>
>From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>On Behalf Of Mike Geary
>Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 9:58 PM
>To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Defending Offense.
>
>
>
>Good try, Lawrence, but no cigar. As American Westerners, you and I have
>beheaded 30,000+ innocent Muslims in Iraq and 6,000 to 10,000 in
>Afghanistan. The blood of innocents drips from our hands. Don't feel so
>magnanimous in your new-found liberalism.
>
>
>
>Mike Geary
>
>Memphis
>
>----- Original Message -----
>
>From: Lawrence <mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Helm
>
>To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 11:47 PM
>
>Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Defending Offense.
>
>
>
>Being Western rather than Muslim, Mike, I have no need to behead you.
>
>
>
>Lawrence
>
>
>
>
> _____
>
>
>From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>On Behalf Of Mike Geary
>Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 9:38 PM
>To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [lit-ideas] Defending Offense.
>
>
>
>I like very much and have great respect for Judy Evans and David Savory,
but
>I insist on my right to be offensive.
>
>
>
>I agree with much that they argue, but I agree more that I have the right
as
>an individual human being to speak my mind whether it offends others or
not.
>Or even to speak my mind hoping to offend others. I know of no right not
to
>be offended. This rightwing, militaristic, devil-take-the-hindmost,
coin-op
>culture offends me from dawn to dusk. I accept that and go about my
>business. Every word out of George Bush's mouth is an offensive insult to
>any intelligent human being. And I promise you, if this war against the
>Muslims being waged by Bush were not ongoing, none of this cartoon business
>would be happening. Not one Muslim would be in the streets were we not in
>Iraq. So this too can be laid at the foot of our beloved Security Hero
>George "Stasi" Bush.
>
>
>
>Mike Geary
>
>Memphis
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
