[Spam] [Vision2020] Thoughts to Nick

[lfalen]

I would agree with Phil in that I don't want to be pigeonholed either. I agree with the libertarians on most things, however they have their head in the sand when it comes to foreign policy.

Roger
-----Original message-----
From: "Phil Nisbet" pcnisbet1 at hotmail.com
Date: Sun,  4 Dec 2005 21:38:20 -0800
To: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: [Spam] [Vision2020] Thoughts to Nick

> Nick
> 
> I am sorry that my mixing and matching of title and name distracts or seems 
> to be a denigration that it is not intended to be.  A constant stream of 
> Nick or Gier seems less desirable from a literary use stand point and hence 
> I chose to break using more than just one.  Hence I have used Professor, 
> Nick, Gier and Dr. Gier, rather than just Nick.  Besides that, you deserve 
> the title for the excellent work you have done in the halls of the academy.
> 
> I will have to say that I am guilty, however, in holding those who are 
> indeed equipped to provide objective discussion, to a much higher standard.  
> The Hansen’s and Fox’s of this world are propagandists because they can not 
> be expected to do a better job or see clearly enough beyond their tiny 
> sphere to glimpse the large panorama.  You are a thinking man, Nick, one 
> with the kind of scope in both intellect and creative thought who is simply 
> better than the limitations of propaganda pieces.
> 
> And no, Nick, I can not be pigeonholed.  I prefer not to pigeonhole people 
> and anybody trying to pigeonhole me is going to have a consistently hard 
> time of it.
> 
> Take a look at your attempt at safely placing me in some category.  Bush 
> apologist?  Hardly.  But I am not a knee jerk person to condemn anybody.  I 
> did not knee jerk and condemn Clinton and I had numerous policy differences 
> with him and his administration, so why should I do similar things to Bush.
> 
> I am not a social conservative.  Freedom for the individual to do as they 
> chose within the confines of their life without harm to others is the 
> essence of Republicanism in the old sense.  Both liberals and conservatives 
> in this day and age seem highly interested in controlling people’s lives and 
> I do not find that acceptable.  Nanny Government from one side and 
> condemnation of people’s wishes from the other side are absolutely 
> anti-Republican and anti-individualist.  The libertarians are correct in 
> that area and I support their efforts.
> 
> But the Libertarians see no role for required regulation and absolutely no 
> foreign policy role for government.  There are bad actors in this world, 
> those who wish to impose on the freedom of others and only in concert can we 
> hope to restrain them.  For a person who believes in freedom and liberation 
> of the human species as individuals to limit the struggle only to the 
> borders of one nation or one community seems very anti-Republican to me.  
> The Republic’s role in protection of the individual from the masses is very 
> much a divide between the standard Libertarian line and where I see the 
> world.
> 
> As for calling into question your and Ralph’s opinion on what you deem to be 
> Judaism’s ideas from an academic perspective, I think you miss the point.  
> Neither of your opinion’s were well educated and left the bulk of what 
> Judaism is and what its history is at the doorstep in order to make the 
> cases you wish to with regards Xtain thought.  When the various documents 
> that make up Jewish thought were written is not a religious thing, its 
> purely academic.  Trying to place various religious parties and their 
> thought outside of the historical context and labeling them original Jewish 
> thought when they were anything but, is simply sloppy work.  My quotes from 
> the Rambam or from Hillel are not my personal opinion; they are the basis of 
> Rabbinic Judaism and hardly ‘special knowledge’.  To try to use Tanakh 
> without reference to Talmud and lay claim to understanding Judaism borders 
> on anti-Semitism in my opinion.  That was especially true in the case of 
> Ralph’s selling their daughters remarks, comments that were almost the same 
> as you can get from any Neo-Nazi website.
> 
> My question in the case of your Iraq article is similar.  You tend to write 
> these works without presenting a full set of datum.  That is the approach 
> used in presenting propaganda.  I doubt that a peer review of your scholarly 
> works would withstand such an approach.  What is worthy of a political hack 
> is not what is worthy of Dr Nick Gier PhD.
> 
> Finally, I am very much looking forward to reading your ideas on India.  
> It’s an amazing country and one worthy of more of our attentions.  The 
> months I spent there were extremely rewarding, but limited in scope.  Seeing 
> your intellect focused on the topic will be a joy.
> 
> Phil Nisbet
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
> http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
> 
> _____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet, 
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
>                http://www.fsr.net                       
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> ¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯