# What is december still doing here? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 7, 2003, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519 "2003-08-07T04:13:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2003, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/161 "2003-08-10T18:17:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\*I didn’t accuse political leaders of murder, nor did I accuse their followers of treason and murder. > > However, I do accuse you of torturing facts and logic. \*\* As stated, there is no other possible interpretation of what you did say, nor have you taken the opportunity to even try. We are all familiar with your particular use of “tortured logic”, having seen you stretch it much farther, for instance in your repeated condemnations of Europeans in general for “supporting” Palestinian terror. And this is just the most egregious example. [How much blame does Europe deserve for financially supporting suicide bombers?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=113497&highlight=Europeans+Arafat) [Should Israeli victims of terroism be allowed to sue the European Union?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=116353&highlight=Europeans+Arafat) [If you oppose the corrupt bigotry of Arab tyrants, why support their positions?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=129239&highlight=Europeans+Arafat) No, perhaps on further reflection, you don’t deserve the exalted titles of troll, liar, dishonest, and racist. You’re just a sorry old schmuck. ---
**Author:** ![Xploder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/a183cd/32.png) [@Xploder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xploder)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2003, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/162 "2003-08-10T20:21:17Z")
Re: The Op He’s posting his views and opinions…pretty much like everyone else here. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2003, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/163 "2003-08-10T21:06:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ElvisL1ves \* > **As stated, there is no other possible interpretation of what you did say, nor have you taken the opportunity to even try.** That’s stupid. It’s pretty obvious there ARE other possible intepretations, given that someone else has apparently interpreted it differently, and given that he quite obviously DOESN’T accuse anyone of treason and in fact specifically said the opposite. There are many things to criticize him for; why you’d make stuff up is a little puzzling. But that’s an old story. ---
**Author:** ![Read\_Neck](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e19b73/32.png) [@Read\_Neck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Read_Neck)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2003, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/164 "2003-08-11T00:17:04Z")
That did it. This whole argument has been done to death and it’s nothing more than a product of the “boomers” that started in the sixties and the hair shirts are stinking to high hell by now. Every single enemy of the US from Ho and Che’ to bin Laden,Hussein and this latest asshole have the weakness of the American people as one of their basic strategies. If they can just endure long enough the “whiners” will win out ala Vietnam. Surely it’s your right and surely you’re going to do it and fuck the consequences. The “ME” generation in all it’s glory. Yep,let’s ban december for even suggesting treason. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2003, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/165 "2003-08-11T01:25:42Z")
You might want to ponder on the fact that **december** himself was one of those “whiners” who allowed the communists to win in Vietnam. I’m tempted to start calling him **JaneFonda**. For the record, I am not in favor of banning **december** , it wouldn’t be the same place without him. ---
**Author:** ![London\_Calling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@London\_Calling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/London_Calling)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2003, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/166 "2003-08-11T01:51:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Dissonance \* > You might want to ponder on the fact that **december** himself was one of those “whiners” who allowed the communists to win in Vietnam. I’m tempted to start calling him \*\*JaneFonda] That’s brilliant, I had no idea; **Hanoi Hymie** , here in our midst - who knew ? ---
**Author:** ![London\_Calling](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/49beb7/32.png) [@London\_Calling](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/London_Calling)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2003, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/167 "2003-08-11T02:00:31Z")
And oh my word ! I should have checked before posting. I just found this: [Offensive Slang Used as a disparaging term for a Jew.](http://www.bartleby.com/61/37/H0353750.html) I had no idea, sorry 'bout thaat **december**. Didn’t know it might be offensive in American slang. And ftr, I have no idea whether it is here or not . . . never come across it in that context. Anyway, how about Hanoi Tarzan ? No ? okay . . . ---
**Author:** ![Boo\_Boo\_Foo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e274bd/32.png) [@Boo\_Boo\_Foo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boo_Boo_Foo)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2003, 11:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/168 "2003-08-11T11:48:21Z")
Wasn’t **Hanoi Hymie** a “CONTROL” agent in the Vietnamese version of Get Smart? ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2003, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/169 "2003-08-11T11:53:46Z")
Well I don’t know about december. I haven’t been around long enough, or haven’t paid enough attention to posters to know what everybody stands for, but I do know that I was just called a Nazi in a thread started by december – and it was not by december. Screw you MC Master of Silly Ceremonies. I’m quite capable of stating my own political position – and it’s certainly not Nazism. And you might think it great debating to throw insults at people with different opinions; personally I think it just shows you off as an ape. You might also be interested in reading about Godwin’s law. Rune ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2003, 11:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/170 "2003-08-11T11:57:08Z")
‘Hymie’ is a pretty offensive term for a Jew, LC. But you apologized and I believe you that it was out of ignorance. Speaking for one Jew…I’ll give you a pass. And ‘Hanoi Tarzan’ is pretty funny. ---
**Author:** ![MMI](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@MMI](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MMI)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2003, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/171 "2003-08-11T16:00:26Z")
First, I apologize for continuing Debaser’s Hijack of this thread with respect to the “How easy do you want this war to be?” thread. I actually considered long and hard before posting anything to that thread because it seemed obvious that my statements would be mischaracterized and vilified. But I did anyways (more fool me perhaps). This was my post following Dinsdale’s OP: > [@](#): > > \*\* > Since the beginning of the war in Afghanistan I have felt that there might, from a certain point of view, be some value in suffering substantial casualties in part of the war against terrorism. > > It seems to me that no one in the world questions that the United States is willing to kill in order to further our national interests/values/defend ourselves. However, it also seems to me that there is some doubt as to whether or not we are willing to die in for the same reasons. I think that this perception is understandable although I do not necessarily agree with it. There are any number of instances where the US was willing to expend firepower and money but not blood (Beirut, Somalia), preferring disengagement to losing our brave young men and women. I could argue that this perception of soft Americans has been around for a long time, with both post-Midway/post Guadalcanal Japanese WWII strategy and North Vietnamese strategy relying on attrition, even at bad exchange rates, to knock the US out of the conflict. So maybe showing we are in the struggle come what may will dissuade others from taking us on. Give credibility to Kennedy’s “pay any price” speech, if you will. > > The flip side is I don’t want any of our servicepeople to die. I do not know that I could face the math, of having people die, even if it could alter potential enemies perceptions. > > And suffering significant casualties (a term which i am incompetent to define) could have the opposite effect, showing the US as being vulnerable rather than the unstoppable collossus. (I would prefer that only we and our friends be aware of our vulnerabilities and failings) \*\* I personally don’t see the above as calling for anyone’s death, but rather engaging in a quasi-historical thought experiment. \*\*Shodan[\b] took exception to my first sentence with the following. (I cannot tell if he read past the first sentence of my post from what he wrote thereafter). He wrote: > [@](#): > > \*\* > Thank you for your thoughts, Mr. bin Laden. \*\* While I was somewhat taken aback by this in depth and to the point rebuttal, I persevered in an attempt to clarify my position: > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MMI \* > \*\*Shodan: Did you read anything I wrote past the first sentence? Allow me to clarify and expand on what I was trying to say. > > First of all, I DON’T WANT CASUALTIES. I don’t want American soldiers to die. I don’t want British soldiers to die. I don’t want Australian soldiers to die. I don’t want Polish soldiers to die. I don’t want Iraqi Kurds, Shiias, Sunnis, Turkomen, or Christians to die. I don’t even particularly want Iraqi soldiers to die\*(although I don’t particularly want Sadaam or Baathist leadership to go on living either.) If however, we do suffer casualties, I can see how it may in the long run help us. > > Now, I will attempt to explain my logic, the abstract point of view I referred to in my first post. If we suffer substantial casualties\*\* and fight on rather than bugging out as we have at times in the past\*\*\*, and persevere until we win, I think that we will have sent a message to both enemies and friends. I feel we will be more valued as an ally and more feared as an enemy. It will be difficult (or dangerous for our enemies) for others to question our devotion to our ideals/interests if they know our actions back up our words even at risk of consequences to ourselves. > > If we suffer casualties it will also be a reminder to us that war is not easy, not to be entered into lightly. When the war started I assumed that it would be over very quickly, and I still hope it will be. But I do fear that easy success will encourage us to send the troops in to other areas, where our interests are less at stake, where we are less likely to stick it out. Did Somalia undercut the military credibility we achieved in Gulf War I, thus encouraging our enemies (and providing them with a blueprint - how to fight the American military and survive)? Possibly. > > Obviously the flip side of the last paragraph is that an America more reluctant to use military force may be unwilling to intervene in the next Kosovo or even the next Rwanda (and I recognize that if we don’t lead, others may not go). > > - I’ll make an exception for those who engage in war crimes (using human shields, murdering POW’s, etc.) > \*\* As I mentioned in my first post, I am not sure what I would consider substantial casualties - more than Grenada, certainly nothing like the Somme > \*\*\*I do realize that the US has fought out a number of conflicts to the end, despite casualties. \*\* Are \*\*Debaser[\b]'s summary or his excerpt from my posts an accurate portrayal of my thoughts or ideas layed out above? Or is he shrewdly uncovering my “agenda”? I would like to note that Peggy Noonan (the prophet of Saint Ronald) took a not dissimilar point of view from mine in this column (a week or two after the above mentioned thread) [http://www.peggynoonan.com/article.php?article=147](http://www.peggynoonan.com/article.php?article=147) , although she calls for the US to maintain its resolve during what will be a long war as a means of putting to bed the Vietnam syndrome. It could be argued using tortured logic that the president’s “bring 'em on” is an incitement for terrorists to kill American and coalition soldiers. He is generally given the benefit of the doubt, with this statement being considered a statement of resolve or a rhetorical flourish. ( I know that this statement was criticized by a number of posters, but the adjectives were more “stupid” and “ill-considered” rather than “murderous” or “treason”. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2003, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/172 "2003-08-11T16:42:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RickJay \* > \*\*That’s stupid. It’s pretty obvious there ARE other possible intepretations Then you ought to be able to explain one cogently, without simply repeating the assertion. Note that he’s done the same shit before, and I’ve even provided you some helpful links for your edification. > [@](#): > > given that someone else has apparently interpreted it differently You mean Libertarian? Please. > [@](#): > > and given that he quite obviously DOESN’T accuse anyone of treason and in fact specifically said the opposite. Been there, done that. Scroll up, lazybones. > [@](#): > > There are many things to criticize him for; why you’d make stuff up is a little puzzling. But that’s an old story. And it’s odd that \*you[i/] of all people should be saying that. As you have shown us before, responsibility for one’s statements is not a subject about which you have much to tell the world. Now either make a case or quit sniveling. ---
**Author:** ![elf6c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c57346/32.png) [@elf6c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elf6c)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2003, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/173 "2003-08-11T17:15:45Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*_Of course I made no such accusation, as has been pointed out. That other thread intended a real debate. \* Are some statements by politicians harmful to the country?_ > > Some of my political adversaries don’t want to look into that question. So they inflated it to a horrific accusation and they now accuse me of having made a horrific accusation. That’s a way of evading the question. (BTW, even Anne Coulter’s preposterous accusation of treason ought to be refuted, in addition to criticizing her excessive vituperation.) > > \*\* Nice to see revistionist history is not limited to your dimwitted political master. Go take a look at the actual title and post you used. Gee, they don’t actually match your claims now-- just like G.W.'s post war claims don’t match his pre-war fantasies of tons of WMD’s ready to go in 45 minutes or of active nuclear programs. To answer the question you should have used (before you poisoned the debate with your despicable OP): yes. G.W. Bush and his cronies repeatedly made false and unsupported statements regarding Iraq which have led us into an unsupported war and occupation (unlike the first Gulf War) and an ongoing international relations disaster among Islamic nations. BTW: While your later backpedaling does show that, belatedly, you understand the large pile of crap you stepped in, your Clinton-esc attempts at word parsing and victimhood are not gaining much traction outside of the usual suspects (aka the Three Stooges). Also, don’t flatter yourself. You currently have **no** _political adversaries_. Given your predeliction towards posting and running, and then ducking any serious reponses you have neither started nor engaged in any serious political debate in quite a while. Lately you seemed to have slipped dangerously close to the foaming mouth partisan ranks. Maybe you have decided it is less work, or are at a loss for cogent well-supported arguments- but in any event this 4 page OP should show you how far you have fallen. Notice **Scylla** and other well known conservative Dopers not getting Pitted. Wonder why? Because even though I often disagree with him on political matters, he posts well thought out and cited OPs. He may be wrong (IMHO), but his OP are backed up and not rehashed Op-Ed pieces or thinly veiled personal attacks. In the end, its your choice. But don’t blame others if you end up the punchline to an often told joke, just like the other one-trick ponies of note in Doper history. ---
**Author:** ![Mtgman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5a626/32.png) [@Mtgman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mtgman)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2003, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/174 "2003-08-11T18:51:08Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Libertarian \* > **As far as I can see, he is talking about politicians, and then only the leaders at that, and then only those who used their bully pulpits. From these particulars — vocal oppostion political strategists taking advantage of a propaganda tactic — you have taken the liberty to extrapolate a broad generality — war opponents — and the result is, in my view, a pair of wholesale misquotes. And you called what you made up “very much like” what December actually said. Oy.** Pick nits if you are so inclined. I stand by my assertion that **december** is tarring war opponents in general with the accusations. He’s done the same thing in dozens of threads. I have always taken great care in being as fair as possible when I re-present another poster’s position. In some cases this may mean the thin veil of weasel words standing between the targets of these kinds of accusations may get stripped. The intent and major substance of the comments, the accusation of aiding/inciting enemies of the US, is preserved. You disagree about the intent and substance, I find your interpretation less credible than mine. As support for my interpretation I note the dozens of threads **december** has started along the lines of the specific cases linked to by **ElvisL1ves** which were very similar to this one. Someone takes a position contrary to the official state line, bad guys get all excited by seeing their enemies divided and go out and do bad things. War opponents are therefore bad for getting the bad guys all excited. It is a recurring theme and I choose to see the forest instead of scrutinizing a tree. You, of course, are free to interpret it as you see fit.\*\* > [@](#): > > I think he has drawn an intelligent distinction between aiding and inciting. It is remarkable to me, as neither a Democrat nor a Republican, that the same people who accuse December of deliberately inciting left-liberal posters here on the SDMB fail to see how a politician’s vocal opposition to a president’s policies in a time of conflict can incite a nation’s enemies.\*\* What I fail to see is how the fact that some nutcases are getting their jollies out of seeing anti-war demonstrations or speeches somehow makes the anti-war people culpable for the actions of those nutcases. **december** has NOT made a distinction between aiding and inciting. Or if he has, he’s made it clear that inciting is something the war opponents should apologize for and try to avoid, in which case the distinction is meaningless. Inciting as a incidental side effect of legitimate criticism is still something which should be reigned in or apologized for. Fuck that. Enjoy, Steven ---
**Author:** ![5\_time\_champ](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/5/278dde/32.png) [@5\_time\_champ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/5_time_champ)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2003, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/175 "2003-08-11T20:21:14Z")
Why he is providing wonderful inspiration for threads such as [these.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=203856) ---
**Author:** ![vanilla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f19dbf/32.png) [@vanilla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vanilla)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2003, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/176 "2003-08-12T00:13:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Libertarian \* > \*\* It is remarkable to me, as neither a Democrat nor a Republican, \*\* what _are_ you, then? ---
**Author:** ![leander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/bcef8e/32.png) [@leander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/leander)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2003, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/177 "2003-08-12T00:52:55Z")
Well, congratulations. The **december** apologists have once again let him off the hook. As for the claims that **december** is accusing war opponents and politicians of causing American deaths and should apologize, take a look at these: First, a thread from **december** just prior to the war: [Those who oppose war in Iraq are supporting Saddam Hussein.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=167331&highlight=opponents) > [@](#): > > I know that almost all sincere Iraq war opponents believe that they oppose Saddam Hussein as well as opposing war. **However, I maintain that they actually are supporting Saddam.** Three reasons why: > > 1. The only practical means of toppling Saddam’s Ba’ath Party rule would appear to be an American-led invasion. If the anti-war people succeed in preventing an American attack, they will also succeed in keeping Saddam in power, even though that wasn’t their goal. **It would be cold comfort to Saddam’s future victims of murder and torture that the anti-war folks didn’t intend them to be victims.** > > 2. In a tendentious political debate, the sides become polarized. Anti-war people typically find themselves ignoring or minimizing Saddam’s evil. Here are some examples: > \ > > 3. Saddam cheered the anti-war demonstrations. **He considered them to be supporting his regime.** > > For these reasons, **I believe that anti-war folks are pro-Saddam, even though that’s not their intent.** Second, a thread started by **Clives Staples L** (March 25) in which **december** chimes in: [Are antiwar protests causing more casualties than necessary?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=172487&highlight=protestors) > [@](#): > > So, Daniel, just who are you helping, other than Saddam Hussein and the Ba’ath Party? And finally, to the thread that inspired this ugly mess: [Terrorist leader calls for jihad against US in order to elect Democrats](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=202730&highlight=protestors) > [@](#): > > 1. Are anti-war comments by these leading Democrats encouraging the murder of Americans in the middle east? Evidently the answer is Yes, whether one likes it or not. Okay, that’s pretty clear. He’s apparently talking only about “leading Democrats”. Still, he’s saying **they encourage the murder of Americans.** Nice. > [@](#): > > 1. If comments by Democratic leaders are serving to encourage America’s enemies, do these comments constitute treason? Not at all IMHO. It’s an unfortunate side-effect of free speech. If you don’t believe this is treason, then why bring it? Just throwing it out there (as you well know) is suggesting that a reasonable person might draw this conclusion. You are clearly fueling the flames of anger against Dems, qualifying it of course with “I don’t have that position…” Class act. > [@](#): > > 1. Should Dean and others apologize to the families of slain servicemen, since their comments encouraged the attacks against them? Yes. The only question here is who constitutes “others”. Based on previous posts, I don’t think it’s absurd to speculate that **december** considers **all** those who make “anti-war comments” to be guilty of “encouraging the murder of Americans”. As you’ve stated earlier, Muslims around the world will find encouragement from the great voice of dissent in America, particularly the outspoken war protestors. If that is the case, then isn’t anyone who speaks out guilty? The _actual_ statement by Nasrallah was “to remove Bush”, not to “elect Democrats”. Why did you put the Dems in the thread title? Just so you could attack them and draw the conclusion that “leading Dems” (who just happen to be running for President) are somehow responsible for American deaths. Yeah, that’s a reasonable way to “debate”… And, of course, many folks here have given links and quotes to various Democratic candidates’ positions on the future of Iraq. You did not respond to any of these – didn’t take them into account, discuss them, refute them, etc. – just ignored them as you so willfully do. But hey, this is your _modus operandi_ on these boards. Let’s just hope more and more people are aware of that. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2003, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/178 "2003-08-12T01:34:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by ElvisL1ves \* > **You mean Libertarian? Please.** So I’m right and your statement was false. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2003, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/179 "2003-08-12T02:10:54Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by leander \* > \*\* Nice. If you don’t believe this is treason, then why bring it? \*\* A lot of people seem to believe that it’s censorship to even allude to the harm that a public statement might cause. I don’t agree with that POV. Lots public statements are perfectly legal, but harmful to a greater or lesser degree. E.g., bigoted statements by political leaders might be legal, but they would damage the country. E.g., unreasonably pessimistic economic projections are certainly legal, but the projections themselves could discourage economic expansion and thus harm the economy. Statements that could harm the country oughtn’t to be made casually. I think statements indicating foreign policy disunity tend to harm the country. Giving this Hamas leader an excuse to encourage terrorism is just one example of how this sort of statement can harm the country. You have quoted some other examples. There’s nothing new about what I’m saying. Historically this principle was recognized in the slogan, “Foreign policy ends at the water’s edge.” That doesn’t mean it’s automatically wrong to criticize the country’s foreign policy. But, IMHO it does mean that critics should be aware of the cost. They should only make the criticism if the benefit to the country exceeds the cost to the country. ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2003, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519/180 "2003-08-12T02:42:54Z")
Here’s an example of legal writings that may have done some harm. The lawyer for a terrorist on trial in connection with the Bali bombing that killed 202 people [“quoted from American satirist Michael Moore’s book Stupid White Men and other anti-western texts.”](http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/08/11/1060588323997.html) That doesn’t prove that the books caused the bombing, of course. Still, it’s something to think about. Apparently this lawyer believes that Moore’s book and other anti-western texts provide some degree of justification for anti-western terrorism. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-is-december-still-doing-here/193519.md?page=10)