I most especially miss her amazing poetry. (Her posts, "prose", were usually in and of themselves poetry.) Poets, you know, can put on various garbs -- but they are mere trappings unrelated to Reality. Julie Krueger On 9/19/07, Mike Geary <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Sorry once again for having sent a reply empty of any Reply. Life gets > complicated at times as everyone of you knows. But here I am back at the > reply and full of confidence that it'll get sent this time. Actually, > it's > hardly a reply, more of an Amen to RP's post on Mirembe. I can't remember > any political posts by her. She seemed to eschew all political > opinion --like David Ritchie or Erin Holder do, except that I doubt either > of them gives a damn about our political anguish -- lucky sods. I've > always > imagined Mirembe as being very politically minded but choosing for > professional reasons to keep her cards close to her chest. I've also > imagined her as being very internationally-politically astute, which would > probably preclude most up or down judgments of political happenings as > Lawrence and I engage in, but I'll be damned if I'll ever let anyone's > diplomatic aplomb curb my righteous refusal to look at the details. I > know > my prejudices and I stand firmly behind them. I only know Mirembe her > through her posts. so everything I say is to be understood in that light. > Almost all of her posts, as I remember, were literary in nature. She took > me to task on more than three occasions over my interpretation of specific > works and literary theory in general -- she was wrong on all counts, of > course, but that should have no bearing on how one judges her skills as a > diplomat with the State Department. Mirembe Nantango! Let's dance!!! > > > Mike Geary > Memphis > wondering if her kid is still tethered in a courtyard with the goats. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Robert Paul" <rpaul@xxxxxxxx> > To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2007 3:25 PM > Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Mirembe and the need for Blackwater > > > > By the way, is the US embassy spokeswoman, Miremebe Nantonga > referred > > to in the AFP article, the same Mirembe who used to be on Lit Ideas > and > > Phil-Lit and with whom I argued on more than one occasion? > > Yes, she is the same person. Whether you 'argued' with her more than once > I cannot say. It's surely possible that you and she disagreed over > something > a couple of times. > > > I can't recall what we argued about but could it have > > been politics or the military? > > No. Mirembe has never on these lists discussed politics in the sense > of taking sides, criticizing US policy, or attacking the sort of > ideology you exemplify. She has never here discussed US policy from > any political stance, and one could not have inferred from her posts > where her political sympathies lay. That should be enough to answer > what you say next: > > > Could [she] have been a typical Lit-Ideas/Phil-Lit member, i.e., a > > Leftist? so, what is she doing in the hated State Department, and > Mike, > > what is she doing defending Blackwater? Did she succumb to filthy > > lucre? Or is she operating out of principle? > > It's depressing to see you still assigning people ('the typical > Lit-Ideas member, e.g.) to categories, the features of which have been > pre-judged. I grant that this saves one the trouble of thinking: 'Oh, > Smith is a member of lit-ideas, so he obviously believes in arming the > jihadists, levitating the Pentagon, and promoting bimetallism.' One > needn't pay any attention to what was actually said, once one knows > who said it. 'The hated State Department'? Who among us has expressed > hatred toward the State Department--the entire State Department? > (Well, it certainly wasn't Mirembe, who throughout her membership on > Phil_lit and its various reincarnations has worked for the State > Department.) > > Mirembe, acting as a spokeswoman for the US Embassy in Baghdad, has > not, in any of her remarks quoted in various newspapers, 'defended' > Blackwater. Nor has she criticized it. > > You move, through a series of rhetorical questions, to a conclusion > about someone's political and professional views; but the conclusion > you seem to be trying to reach would only be supported if one accepted > your own implicit answers to your own questions. Since your answers > are false, the most you have done is to slander by innuendo, a person > who was for years an ornament among the contributors to these lists. > > Robert Paul > Reed College > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > 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 >