I thought I was pointing out errors in your reasoning and explictly doing so.
I thought I argued that:
1. a) not everyone would agree with that definition of atemi b) atemi causes harm -- if not physically, then psychologically by forcing uke to react to the possibility of physical harm
2. I don't believe anyone has the ability to lead someone insofar as dictating what they can and cannot do on such a level as to virtually eliminate harm unless it is either cooperative training or they are far more skilled and experienced than their attacker.
We can agree to disagree if you feel that I'm reframing the argument. That's cool. No worries.
For the record, I find myself in agreement with Dan,
Violence appears to me to be doing anything that harms another person, I just don't care about your intent - it doesn't matter.
Unless posts are specific addressed to me, I'm done. Thanks all for a very thought provoking discussion.