[Buddha-l] Accuracy

[Dan Lusthaus]

To respond briefly to Richard's spiel on accuracy:

I have indeed accused him of cheering for Ahmadinejad (and Chavez) for 
trash-talking the US.

Oh, I'm so embarrassed. What he actually said was:

{QUOTE}
In fact, it's almost axiomatic that a
Western Buddhist will have a leftist orientation. (I imagine more than a few
of us cheered wildly as we listened to the speeches by Ahmadinejad and 
Chavez
in the UN. We love it when people speak truth to power.)
{END QUOTE}

Gee, how inaccurate of me!

They are the power, and they trash-talk the US (and Zionists) to win 
admirers and supporters among the fuzzy-headed leftists who will then look 
the other way when they go home and oppress their own citizens. (At Columbia 
U Ahmadinejad learned that he could trash talk the US and Israel, and even 
demand the right to nuke Israel without anyone batting an eyelash, but he 
can't say anything negative about gays without creating a memorable uproar. 
Must have confirmed for him what a decadent, infidel society we are.)

Richard writes:

"Ahmadinejad's critique of the USA and Israel was right on target."

Which part? About the holocaust that never happened being the cause of the 
State (so they should all go back to where they came from)? That secular 
Israel and the US are not good leftists like the facist theocrats who run 
Iran and have national holidays celebrating their genocidal antisemitism? 
You are drawing from the wrong well and bad information, but, as this list 
continually evidences, malicious myths are hard to squelch.

Richard also writes:

{QUOTE}
On another list, Dan Lusthaus speaks of how many Westerners are drawn to
Buddhism because of a "carefully crafted" image of Buddhism as non-violent. 
I
think that's an example of bovine feces.
{END QUOTE}

As I mentioned, a book review of the Jerryson and Juergensmeyer book 
_Buddhist Warfare_ is in the H-Net queue, and as soon as it passes through 
the editorial gauntlet I will forward a copy of that here (it wouldn't be 
cricket to post it here before it's been through its final revision). Then 
we can revisit who is covered in cow pies.


Richard also writes:

"As a Buddhist, I follow the principle: Look at the saying, not the 
speaker."

Which Bob Wooley morphs into:

{QUOTE}
if I cannot find _something_ admirable in any person, that is
evidence that I am not well acquainted with the person's qualities, or that
I lack discernment.
{END QUOTE}

What a gracious, magnanimous sentiment. Sounds very noble. The citizens of 
Iran applaud your generosity
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/13/world/middleeast/13iran.html?scp=1&sq=iran%20protests&st=cse

I also have some admiration for a quality in Ahmadinejad, viz. his 
rhetorical skill at finding supporters for his hate-speech  -- and by 
current evidence supporters who then pat themselves on the back for being 
righteous in giving that suipport. What a marvelous skill he has!

Please don't associate that delusional attitude with Buddhism, thank you. 
That's exactly the sort of mara-ish delusion one is supposed to learn to see 
through.

Dan