Foreword, when is a homeland not a homeland?

[s~Z]

I think this medium, an email discussion list, is prone to the creation of
straw. And with the cast here, bugs in a manger come to mind. Paul N. just
can't believe how many times he's been misrepresented, and half the time
he's misrepresenting what he thinks someone is thinking he said when they're
actually talking about someone or something else. It is almost impossible,
with this many opinionated voices talking simultaneously in a written forum,
to keep the specifics clear regarding who really said what. And, no, neither
Doug, nor Dave, called me a fascist, and I never accused either of so doing.
I don't really think anyone called me a fascist. I was alluding to the
implications of someone's attribution of TRP's fascisistism to a certain
line of thought which I was snorting. But, seems to me we all almost agree.
The essay is written such that multiple readings are called for, and are
valid. It isn't specifically addressing 9/11, it is addressing, among other
things, the problem of governmental control, as it relates to 1984 and to
the world. 9/11 is an event which fits into the general themes P. is
addressing and it is fair game to speculate how his take applies although he
doesn't make a direct statement about 9/11 nor its aftermath. He alludes to
it. He is keeping the essay more general, as Doug said, so it would still be
applicable decades from now, not just an essay about our current events. And
as jbor said, to keep the focus more on the novel to which it is a foreword.
Has the argument been lame and silly? Who cares? If this many people get
involved enough to enjoy this silliness, so be it.