Political Correctness is Killing Us -Part 3
GS Don Morris, Ph.D.
May 12,2007
An emerging body of evidence demonstrates not only political correctness in action but also should sound warning bells and lights about the intention of Islam today. The manipulation of certain freedoms found only in Western countries to create a different social sphere is the end game of PC. Here are some selective and instructive examples of this strategy at work:
· Airport adds foot basins for Muslim cabbies
Police worry about Kansas City 'catering' to Islamic rituals. The Kansas City International Airport has added several foot-washing basins in restrooms to accommodate a growing number of Muslim taxicab drivers who requested the facilities to prepare for daily Islamic prayer.1
· Christian British Airway employee to take legal action over suspension for wearing cross- The airline's uniform code states that staff must not wear visible jewelry or other 'adornments' while on duty without permission from management. It makes exceptions for Muslim and Sikh minorities by allowing them to wear hijabs and turbans.2
· A school in Amsterdam will no longer be teaching students about farm living, after Muslim pupils began trashing the classroom when the subject of pigs was introduced.3
· At Lewiston, ME Middle School, placing pork in the mere presence of Muslims is currently being called a hate crime. Note: Jews also believe pork is unclean but, there has never been any effort by the public school system to remove pork, in order to honor their religious beliefs.4
· “Schools are dropping controversial subjects from history lessons - such as the Holocaust and the Crusades - because teachers do not want to cause offence, Government research has discovered.”5 At the risk of offending someone, it is now educationally prudent to disregard history. Thus, if a person cannot handle facts, a school or institution of education should honor the feelings rather than honor the truth. The rationale provided by these teachers is usually wrapped within the following justification:” Some teachers dropped the Holocaust completely from lessons because of fears that Muslim pupils might express anti-Semitic reactions.”5 Do you really think they were concerned for the Jewish students or might they be more concerned about subsequent Muslim student behavior? Ask yourself, if the teachers were so concerned about the Jews and their feelings, why did they choose not to teach about the Holocaust?
This final part 3 unmasks the tactics of those promoting PC and offers some alternatives for individuals who believe that this kind of thinking is killing us. Let’s begin with some assumptions:
· PC obscures clear thinking and damages the very people and causes they claim to benefit
· PC has been described as the cancer of society, a virus that spreads quickly - eating its way through established social standards and values
· PC is effective because we accept “makes me” language as truth and hold ourselves responsible for the thoughts, feelings and actions of others.5
Groups use PC as a weapon to defeat their opposition or enemy. Their common strategy is to wear down, erode and create dissension among members of groups of people with respect to thoughts, feelings and actions that are appropriate. The end game is to indicate that group A’s beliefs are superior to the beliefs of all other groups and, thus, socially engineer a change in attitudes and actions of people. One is expected to ultimately deny one’s own beliefs and set of values and acquiesce to the now dominant view of the world. The society is no longer based upon free speech and common sense; it is grounded in PC ideals and the West is at risk for this assault. Without firing a shot, without building a military machine, the fifth column of PC thinkers slowly, over time, help erode a nation’s will, moral clarity, and submission ultimately occurs. PC tactics have been applied within the world of education, politics, business, religion, and social groups.
The tactics used against us have been effective, efficient and inexpensive. Islamists (values contrary,VC Islamists)* recognized years ago that we in the West had fallen prey to political correctness. They knew then and know today that the very strengths of Western society are the beliefs and values that are dear to us. However, they also recognized that these were our social “Achilles Heel” as well. We are generally a compassionate group of citizens, kind-hearted, caring, respectful of others and their points of view. We are tolerant, supportive of the less fortunate and/or disadvantaged, and guardians of personal freedoms. Given our values and beliefs, the tactics are fundamentally working because we accept, agree, and engage in the “makes me structure” presented in the second part of this series. We believe people are responsible for making others to have feelings, thoughts, and ideas. Based upon this, we further believe there is an uncontrollable cause and effect with people then acting upon these same feelings and thoughts. Therefore we become responsible for the essence of other human beings. As stated previously this is not true!5 However, those who do not believe in our way of life capitalize upon this psychological construct and have imported their tactics to multiple facets of our lives. Only a few are to be now examined.
Notice that VC Islamists use guilt and group guilt control to discredit, demean and disarm those it disagrees with and they engage in the very behavior which they condemn in others of - using social and political force to subdue dissent. This plays particularly well with a group of people who operate from positions and beliefs of tolerance, caring, empathy, never wanting to 'offend'. The end result is that we have “learned” not to voice our opinions and our beliefs and thus back down to every comment made. The difficulty then becomes once a group backs down time after time, the OFFENDED group makes demands under the cloud of either expressed or inferred threats. Repeated often enough, you fill in the rest! This begins the erosion of beliefs and more importantly the degradation of our will to stand against those with an opposing point of view. The very foundation the USA was founded upon freedom of expression; it becomes unidirectional and marks the beginning of the end.
Another tactic the VC Islamists use, in an ever-increasing quantity, is to make demands in social, cultural, political behavior. In fear of OFFENDING them or fear of retribution in the form of name calling, physical harm, political and economic pressure (code for threats), we are willing to give away what we believe to be true, we abdicate our responsibilities to our families, our own social groups and our country and we “stand down”. This repeated over time leads to the degradation of a society, it impacts our will to support what we believe, our perseverance wanes and we make social and political decisions that enhance our enemy. We “fool” ourselves into believing that we can co-exist, that they also believe in personal freedom, we begin to listen for what we want to hear rather than listen for what is BEING said. We reduce the budget for our military and intelligence communities, we increase immigration with Muslim countries, we help fund Islamic education centers and other programs-we do so with public monies. At the same time a most interesting behavior emerges, we vote Islamic-centered politicians into office because we believe that tolerance and acceptance transform any enemy who disagrees with our values. We do all of this even though the data, the behavior, the VC Islamists themselves tell us what and how they intend to transform our country into an Islamic one. We turn our “proverbial cheek” to the following:
· Updating the item on Azerbaijan in yesterday’s dispatch - the aid workers yesterday. Azerbaijani journalist who criticized Islam along with his editor has been jailed for two months.
· Updating the items on Somalia in yesterday’s dispatch - Islamist officials yesterday arrested at least 100 people in Lower Shabelle province in Somalia because they were watching a movie. The new Islamic regime has banned movies. Those arrested included women and children who were watching an Indian film.
· The Red Cross today suspended its activities in the Gaza Strip until further notice after Palestinian gunmen kidnapped two of its Italian aid workers yesterday.
There are thousands of other examples; these serve only as reminders. What can we do? Is there still time? First, take some moments and clearly define for yourself what your core beliefs are. Second, clearly understand the “makes me believe” construct, begin to listen for it and realize you do have a choice when events, people, circumstances and feelings present themselves to you. Third, locate one other person who supports your new found position that no longer will political correctness deny you taking actions against those who want to impose their values upon us. It is fine if you are not politically correct. Fourth, consider the following points:
· Not being PC does not mean you are a racist, fascist or any other -ist
· Not being PC does not mean you are not concerned about the lives of others
· Not being PC does not make you mean spirited
· Not being PC does not mean you are insensitive to the plight of others
· Not being PC does not mean you have phobias with religions, lifestyle choices, or people
· Not being PC does come with responsibility:
1. Clarity of thought and intentions
2. Selection of language used to express thoughts, feelings and ideas
3. Taking a stand for your beliefs and values even in the face of dismissal, denial and degradation of one’s character by others
HOWEVER, IF YOU ARE PC
· It does not mean you have to give up your values
· It does not mean you cannot defend your way of life, what you believe in and how you choose to live your life
When PC seriously influences government policy development and implementation that places the advantage in our enemy’s hands, PC has literally killed us and will continue to do so until we as a people stand up for our way of life! Perhaps Ms. Nirenstein says it best with this assertion, "You cannot run away from reality indefinitely. Ultimately, you have to know what's right in terms of values, and be courageous about standing up for them."6
End Notes
1. Airport adds foot basins for Muslim cabbies Police worry about Kansas City 'catering' to Islamic rituals, April 28, 2007, WorldNetDaily.com
2. JANE MERRICK, Christian BA employee to take legal action over suspension for wearing cross”, 14th October 2006
3. School Scraps Nature Course As Pigs Enrage Muslim Pupils.
AMSTERDAM, 27/04/07
4. Sher Zieve, “Muslims Call Ham Sandwich Hate Crime”, The Family Security Foundation, Inc., April 25, 2007
5. Morris, GS Don, “Political Correctness is Killing Us-Part Two”,http://writingtw.blogspot.com/, April 22,2007.
6. Fiamma Nirenstein,” Making the case for commonality”, in an article written by Ruthie Blum, Jerusalem Post, May 9,2007.
Special thanks to my editor-Chana Givon-co-director of WTW
*”Values contrary” simply acknowledges that a group of Islamists hold life, religious and social values contrary to Western social and cultural values
Also posted on: http://writingtw.blogspot.com/
www.PRIMERCT.org
Senin, 14 Mei 2007
Sabtu, 21 April 2007
Political Correctness is Killing Us-Part Two
GS Don Morris, Ph.D.
April 22, 2007
It is as though we believe that political correctness (PC) has always been present; at least one generation of Americans has now “grown up” in a culture awash with PC language and behavior becoming acculturated with the belief that one must never speak or act in a manner that offends another human being. A minimal search on the Internet yields over 1.3 million story possibilities on the topic of PC examples-trust me; we live in a PC world. There are multiple groups who monitor language for purposes of identifying such language. For example, Language Monitor produces annual word and phrase lists for our edification.
The lists transcend politics, religion, education, business and daily conversation. This is not only specific to the USA the following are other examples:
· New Zealand- Parliament erected a fake Christmas tree with no lights to avoid any fire risk, and took off the angel to avoid offending non-Christians.
· Australia- “I grieve for the rise of the new political correctness—the hypocritical demand of the conservative establishment in this country for civility in political debate.”
· Great Britain- the (British) Daily Mail, reports on “Samaritan’s Purse” a Christian charity bringing Christmas cheer to needy children abroad, that this year has banned “Jesus, God and anything else connected with its own faith” in case Muslims are offended.
· USA- The Democrats represent full-throttle political correctness while Republicans stand ready to advance political correctness just a little bit more slowly.
Finally, I imagine you have all been privy to some or all of these:
midget = vertically challenged gay = different
fired = laid off tall = person of height
homeless = residentially flexible Indian = Native American
poor = financially inept perverted = sexually dysfunctional
blind = visually challenged body odor = non-discretionary fragrance
Enough you say and I gladly join in your refrain. However, I cannot resist sharing one final example. What perhaps began with the best of intentions has now become more often than not somewhat laughable. Just some days ago in Poole Hospital in Dorset, England the staff was 'banned' from serving hot cross buns on Good Friday to avoid offending non-Christians (code for Muslims). Curiously, the hospital management, after some pressure from patients and workers did serve the hot cross buns on Easter Sunday. Of course, the tradition for centuries was to have them served on Good Friday. Ridiculous extremism or neurotic actions taken by a few who at best can be called appeasers?
Language is important as it is used to express ideas, thoughts and feelings. What is said and how it is expressed is important. Implicit and complicit with the concept of political correctness is a belief that one’s language can make someone else or others think, feel and act in a particular manner. I refer to this as the “makes-me-believe structure”, the essence of which is that a person’s words are responsible for making another person act, think, and/or feel fine, sad, happy, excited, in control, out of control, troubled, secure, and so many additional other thoughts, feelings and actions. This can be a powerful social and political device when employed in a diligent manner. It says that you are not responsible. As a matter of fact, it tells you that someone or something else is in control. This can lead you to believe that you are not responsible for your reactions to the people, events, and other things in your life. Therefore it is disabling to you. We see the results of a “makes-me-believe structure” every day and everywhere. Daily we hear the following:
· You make me so angry, I am going to …
· Driving on the freeway makes me so nervous, I sometimes …
· If I had a BMW, I would be accepted by …
· Must be the club that sliced the ball out of bounds
· Using the incorrect words or phrases will offend someone and hurt their feelings …
This structure works in two directions: if you accept that you can make someone …than you speak and act in a like manner toward that someone. Reverse the direction; you actually believe that someone or something outside of you can make you feel, act and think a certain way. Has it ever happened that you get a flat tire, get out of the car, kick the flat or use some four-letter words to describe your feelings and then blame the tire for causing you to feel angry? The power and control lies outside of yourself and you have entered the world of irresponsible actions, feelings and thoughts.
Here is the danger of such a belief structure: you give the power of control and responsibility to someone or something else. You act consistently in this manner and accept what others say as the truth. Political correctness has become so dominant in our culture due to this makes-me-believe structure. Here is an example: Individuals actually believe that they are responsible for another person’s feelings, thus you cannot say anything that may offend someone. Allow me to suggest that you are not responsible for anyone’s feelings. An individual’s feelings belong to each person and each of us can either own the feelings or blame them on others. Imagine the power one has if you subscribe to the latter point of view! Contrary to popular belief and myth is that a person can control one’s feelings-it is not possible. Go ahead, test this out-right now feel euphoric-do so for 30 seconds-now stop and feel profound sadness. The truth is that we all have feelings-own them and learn to deal with them in a responsible way.
The entire structure of political correctness operates upon a faulty belief system and yet it has become the dominant social and political tool used by groups today.
When someone says something to you, you have a choice as to how you will perceive it, think about it, and respond to it. The PC crowd has taught you to perceive/think/respond in a particular manner and the rest of us have allowed this to occur. I say–no more! The most common refrain I hear and read from Islamists should anyone dare to ask critical questions is that “we are offended/your words are offensive to Islam/you have insulted Islam” are among but a few thrown in our direction. There is a PC expectation that follows the “I am offended” statement. First an apology must be forthcoming, penance must be demonstrated, and finally repentance must be enjoined. Others and I are not responsible for offending Islamists; we are, however, responsible for what we say. Given my intention is to ask critical questions then how these are perceived and the resultant choice by the listener as to how he/she will hear the question the responsibility lies with the listener. The assumption is that the listener is willing to be held accountable for his/her own thoughts, feelings and actions.
Of course the PC groups do not want us to wake up and see through their faulty thinking and/or arrogant behavior. They count upon us to stand down when the “O” word is thrown at us. The result has been a most interesting and dangerous political and social engineering within the western countries. People have become afraid to state their personal values, stand up for these values and take the necessary actions to ensure that our culture we so love remains intact. The final Part Three of what has amounted to a short treatise will present additional strategies to counter the dangers of political correctness. A case study will be used to demonstrate additional strategies that can be used to combat the dangers of PC.
End Notes
1. The Top Politically InCorrect Words for 2006: http://www.languagemonitor.com/wst_page20.html
2. No Offence: Political Correctness in New Zealand
3. New Correctness August 26, 2002 http://www.australianpolitics.com/news/2002/08/02-08-26.shtml
4. POLITICAL CORRECTNESS GONE MAD”, Nov 22,2006
http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/000801.html
5. The gods of Political Correctness, Thursday, March 15, 2007
http://thisisrich.blogspot.com/2007/03/gods-of-political-correctness.html
6. Political correctness urban style
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=political+correctness
7. JAMES MILLS, “Hospital that 'banned' hot cross buns to avoid offending non-Christians”, April 10, 2007, Daily Mail.
Special acknowledgment and thank you to my editor Chana Givon
Online: http://writingtw.blogspot.com/ & http://docstalk.blogspot.com/
GS Don Morris, Ph.D.
April 22, 2007
It is as though we believe that political correctness (PC) has always been present; at least one generation of Americans has now “grown up” in a culture awash with PC language and behavior becoming acculturated with the belief that one must never speak or act in a manner that offends another human being. A minimal search on the Internet yields over 1.3 million story possibilities on the topic of PC examples-trust me; we live in a PC world. There are multiple groups who monitor language for purposes of identifying such language. For example, Language Monitor produces annual word and phrase lists for our edification.
The lists transcend politics, religion, education, business and daily conversation. This is not only specific to the USA the following are other examples:
· New Zealand- Parliament erected a fake Christmas tree with no lights to avoid any fire risk, and took off the angel to avoid offending non-Christians.
· Australia- “I grieve for the rise of the new political correctness—the hypocritical demand of the conservative establishment in this country for civility in political debate.”
· Great Britain- the (British) Daily Mail, reports on “Samaritan’s Purse” a Christian charity bringing Christmas cheer to needy children abroad, that this year has banned “Jesus, God and anything else connected with its own faith” in case Muslims are offended.
· USA- The Democrats represent full-throttle political correctness while Republicans stand ready to advance political correctness just a little bit more slowly.
Finally, I imagine you have all been privy to some or all of these:
midget = vertically challenged gay = different
fired = laid off tall = person of height
homeless = residentially flexible Indian = Native American
poor = financially inept perverted = sexually dysfunctional
blind = visually challenged body odor = non-discretionary fragrance
Enough you say and I gladly join in your refrain. However, I cannot resist sharing one final example. What perhaps began with the best of intentions has now become more often than not somewhat laughable. Just some days ago in Poole Hospital in Dorset, England the staff was 'banned' from serving hot cross buns on Good Friday to avoid offending non-Christians (code for Muslims). Curiously, the hospital management, after some pressure from patients and workers did serve the hot cross buns on Easter Sunday. Of course, the tradition for centuries was to have them served on Good Friday. Ridiculous extremism or neurotic actions taken by a few who at best can be called appeasers?
Language is important as it is used to express ideas, thoughts and feelings. What is said and how it is expressed is important. Implicit and complicit with the concept of political correctness is a belief that one’s language can make someone else or others think, feel and act in a particular manner. I refer to this as the “makes-me-believe structure”, the essence of which is that a person’s words are responsible for making another person act, think, and/or feel fine, sad, happy, excited, in control, out of control, troubled, secure, and so many additional other thoughts, feelings and actions. This can be a powerful social and political device when employed in a diligent manner. It says that you are not responsible. As a matter of fact, it tells you that someone or something else is in control. This can lead you to believe that you are not responsible for your reactions to the people, events, and other things in your life. Therefore it is disabling to you. We see the results of a “makes-me-believe structure” every day and everywhere. Daily we hear the following:
· You make me so angry, I am going to …
· Driving on the freeway makes me so nervous, I sometimes …
· If I had a BMW, I would be accepted by …
· Must be the club that sliced the ball out of bounds
· Using the incorrect words or phrases will offend someone and hurt their feelings …
This structure works in two directions: if you accept that you can make someone …than you speak and act in a like manner toward that someone. Reverse the direction; you actually believe that someone or something outside of you can make you feel, act and think a certain way. Has it ever happened that you get a flat tire, get out of the car, kick the flat or use some four-letter words to describe your feelings and then blame the tire for causing you to feel angry? The power and control lies outside of yourself and you have entered the world of irresponsible actions, feelings and thoughts.
Here is the danger of such a belief structure: you give the power of control and responsibility to someone or something else. You act consistently in this manner and accept what others say as the truth. Political correctness has become so dominant in our culture due to this makes-me-believe structure. Here is an example: Individuals actually believe that they are responsible for another person’s feelings, thus you cannot say anything that may offend someone. Allow me to suggest that you are not responsible for anyone’s feelings. An individual’s feelings belong to each person and each of us can either own the feelings or blame them on others. Imagine the power one has if you subscribe to the latter point of view! Contrary to popular belief and myth is that a person can control one’s feelings-it is not possible. Go ahead, test this out-right now feel euphoric-do so for 30 seconds-now stop and feel profound sadness. The truth is that we all have feelings-own them and learn to deal with them in a responsible way.
The entire structure of political correctness operates upon a faulty belief system and yet it has become the dominant social and political tool used by groups today.
When someone says something to you, you have a choice as to how you will perceive it, think about it, and respond to it. The PC crowd has taught you to perceive/think/respond in a particular manner and the rest of us have allowed this to occur. I say–no more! The most common refrain I hear and read from Islamists should anyone dare to ask critical questions is that “we are offended/your words are offensive to Islam/you have insulted Islam” are among but a few thrown in our direction. There is a PC expectation that follows the “I am offended” statement. First an apology must be forthcoming, penance must be demonstrated, and finally repentance must be enjoined. Others and I are not responsible for offending Islamists; we are, however, responsible for what we say. Given my intention is to ask critical questions then how these are perceived and the resultant choice by the listener as to how he/she will hear the question the responsibility lies with the listener. The assumption is that the listener is willing to be held accountable for his/her own thoughts, feelings and actions.
Of course the PC groups do not want us to wake up and see through their faulty thinking and/or arrogant behavior. They count upon us to stand down when the “O” word is thrown at us. The result has been a most interesting and dangerous political and social engineering within the western countries. People have become afraid to state their personal values, stand up for these values and take the necessary actions to ensure that our culture we so love remains intact. The final Part Three of what has amounted to a short treatise will present additional strategies to counter the dangers of political correctness. A case study will be used to demonstrate additional strategies that can be used to combat the dangers of PC.
End Notes
1. The Top Politically InCorrect Words for 2006: http://www.languagemonitor.com/wst_page20.html
2. No Offence: Political Correctness in New Zealand
3. New Correctness August 26, 2002 http://www.australianpolitics.com/news/2002/08/02-08-26.shtml
4. POLITICAL CORRECTNESS GONE MAD”, Nov 22,2006
http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/000801.html
5. The gods of Political Correctness, Thursday, March 15, 2007
http://thisisrich.blogspot.com/2007/03/gods-of-political-correctness.html
6. Political correctness urban style
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=political+correctness
7. JAMES MILLS, “Hospital that 'banned' hot cross buns to avoid offending non-Christians”, April 10, 2007, Daily Mail.
Special acknowledgment and thank you to my editor Chana Givon
Online: http://writingtw.blogspot.com/ & http://docstalk.blogspot.com/
Selasa, 17 April 2007
Only in Israel
By Don Morris
As a non-Jew living in Israel these past 9 years, I continue to be struck each year with the power of the Holocaust Remembrance Day. Beginning yesterday at sundown, most of the Israeli TV channels ceased programming-the day of remembering had begun. I watched several shows about the Holocaust and the most powerful ones interviewed survivors and their stories. To not be moved by these words is to demonstrate a callous disregard for your fellow human being or an amoral attitude toward life.
Today, as I was returning home along the sea, the sirens went off, precisely at 10 am-we all stopped, some bowed their heads in prayer, others had tears rolling down onto their cheeks and I felt and experienced yet another day of remembering. You know, it is truly something to be privileged to be in this country at any time but especially today. I invite all of my colleagues,
friends and family to one day join us-if you have an ache in your heart and/or a concern that we are losing our sense of humanity, come to Israel and be renewed in faith and spirit.
I read today that worldwide violence against Jews is surging and that global antisemitism is spiraling upward, this found in a research study by the Tel Aviv University. So many of my friends and colleagues do not believe this is true-I can assure you it is-I know from personal experience as we travel in Europe. As one examines the data, you understand that the danger of such
planned, orchestrated violence portends much for those living contently in the West.
The one place in the world, where one can safely be a Jew is here in Israel. Regardless of your perceived identity as Jewish, you are safe here. Not only is this a land for all of the religious Jews, it is here for those secular Jews who embrace their “Jewishness” as well as those who seem to loathe theirs. I know of no other place, including the USA, where this can be said as a truth. My friends, it is this spirit and tolerance that should be recognized by all the world’s nations!
Also online at: http://www.israpundit.com/2006/
http://docstalk.blogspot.com/
By Don Morris
As a non-Jew living in Israel these past 9 years, I continue to be struck each year with the power of the Holocaust Remembrance Day. Beginning yesterday at sundown, most of the Israeli TV channels ceased programming-the day of remembering had begun. I watched several shows about the Holocaust and the most powerful ones interviewed survivors and their stories. To not be moved by these words is to demonstrate a callous disregard for your fellow human being or an amoral attitude toward life.
Today, as I was returning home along the sea, the sirens went off, precisely at 10 am-we all stopped, some bowed their heads in prayer, others had tears rolling down onto their cheeks and I felt and experienced yet another day of remembering. You know, it is truly something to be privileged to be in this country at any time but especially today. I invite all of my colleagues,
friends and family to one day join us-if you have an ache in your heart and/or a concern that we are losing our sense of humanity, come to Israel and be renewed in faith and spirit.
I read today that worldwide violence against Jews is surging and that global antisemitism is spiraling upward, this found in a research study by the Tel Aviv University. So many of my friends and colleagues do not believe this is true-I can assure you it is-I know from personal experience as we travel in Europe. As one examines the data, you understand that the danger of such
planned, orchestrated violence portends much for those living contently in the West.
The one place in the world, where one can safely be a Jew is here in Israel. Regardless of your perceived identity as Jewish, you are safe here. Not only is this a land for all of the religious Jews, it is here for those secular Jews who embrace their “Jewishness” as well as those who seem to loathe theirs. I know of no other place, including the USA, where this can be said as a truth. My friends, it is this spirit and tolerance that should be recognized by all the world’s nations!
Also online at: http://www.israpundit.com/2006/
http://docstalk.blogspot.com/
Kamis, 29 Maret 2007
New Feature
Letters to the Editor-Spanish into English Translation
*Israel y los medios* http://www.laopinion.com/editorial/tribuna.html?rkey=00000000000001399691 26 de marzo de 2007
Aggie Hoffman, Los Ángeles, California.
Resulta chocante que el informe sobre "El nuevo gobierno palestino" (19 de marzo 2007) se refiere a la plataforma del nuevo gobierno de unidad como una coalición más moderada. Peor es que esta característica, una creación editorial de la agencia de noticias AP, fue repetida por La Opinión como si fuera un hecho.
No menos triste es el intento de los medios de enturbiar la verdad, atribuyendo moderación a la negativa constante de reconocer el derecho de existir de Israel y a la "resistencia" de la ocupación israelí. La "resistencia" aludida no es en este caso más que un eufemismo para describir al terrorismo. Ignora en su totalidad la incitación diaria a matar judíos, que es parte de los medios de comunicación palestinos, de los sermones de imams al servicio palestino, y de libros de texto que claman falsamente que Palestina, desde el río Jordán hasta el Mediterráneo, pertenece a los árabes.
Este gobierno "moderado" no perdió tiempo en demostrar sus objetivos cuando Hamás reclamó ayer responsabilidad de un disparo contra un empleado de la empresa de electricidad israelí cerca del cruce fronterizo con Gaza y cuando en el cruce israelí egipcio mismo, un potencial suicida fue arrestado con una bomba.
El gobierno de unidad no tiene moderación, solo iguales partes de maldad.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________-
It is shocking that the report El Nuevo gobierno palestino (19 de marzo de 2007) refers to the platform of the new unity government as a more moderate coalition. Worse is that this characteristic, an editorial creation of AP, is repeated by La Opinion as if it were fact. Equally sad is the attempt of this press to whitewash the truth—attributing moderation to the continued refusal to recognize Israel's right to exist and "resistance of Israeli occupation. Resistance is nothing less than a euphemism for terror. Also ignored in its entirely is the daily incitement to kill Jews that is part of the Palestinian controlled media, sermons of imams on Palestinian payroll, and textbooks that falsely claim that Palestine, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, belongs to the Arabs.
This new government wasted no time in demonstrating its goals when Hamas claimed responsibility yesterday for shooting an Israeli electrical worker near the Gaza border crossing and at the Egyptian crossing into Israel, a would-be suicide bomber was arrested.
There is no moderation in the unity government; there is only an equal amount of evil.
Letters to the Editor-Spanish into English Translation
*Israel y los medios* http://www.laopinion.com/editorial/tribuna.html?rkey=00000000000001399691 26 de marzo de 2007
Aggie Hoffman, Los Ángeles, California.
Resulta chocante que el informe sobre "El nuevo gobierno palestino" (19 de marzo 2007) se refiere a la plataforma del nuevo gobierno de unidad como una coalición más moderada. Peor es que esta característica, una creación editorial de la agencia de noticias AP, fue repetida por La Opinión como si fuera un hecho.
No menos triste es el intento de los medios de enturbiar la verdad, atribuyendo moderación a la negativa constante de reconocer el derecho de existir de Israel y a la "resistencia" de la ocupación israelí. La "resistencia" aludida no es en este caso más que un eufemismo para describir al terrorismo. Ignora en su totalidad la incitación diaria a matar judíos, que es parte de los medios de comunicación palestinos, de los sermones de imams al servicio palestino, y de libros de texto que claman falsamente que Palestina, desde el río Jordán hasta el Mediterráneo, pertenece a los árabes.
Este gobierno "moderado" no perdió tiempo en demostrar sus objetivos cuando Hamás reclamó ayer responsabilidad de un disparo contra un empleado de la empresa de electricidad israelí cerca del cruce fronterizo con Gaza y cuando en el cruce israelí egipcio mismo, un potencial suicida fue arrestado con una bomba.
El gobierno de unidad no tiene moderación, solo iguales partes de maldad.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________-
It is shocking that the report El Nuevo gobierno palestino (19 de marzo de 2007) refers to the platform of the new unity government as a more moderate coalition. Worse is that this characteristic, an editorial creation of AP, is repeated by La Opinion as if it were fact. Equally sad is the attempt of this press to whitewash the truth—attributing moderation to the continued refusal to recognize Israel's right to exist and "resistance of Israeli occupation. Resistance is nothing less than a euphemism for terror. Also ignored in its entirely is the daily incitement to kill Jews that is part of the Palestinian controlled media, sermons of imams on Palestinian payroll, and textbooks that falsely claim that Palestine, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, belongs to the Arabs.
This new government wasted no time in demonstrating its goals when Hamas claimed responsibility yesterday for shooting an Israeli electrical worker near the Gaza border crossing and at the Egyptian crossing into Israel, a would-be suicide bomber was arrested.
There is no moderation in the unity government; there is only an equal amount of evil.
Senin, 26 Maret 2007
Political Correctness is Killing Us-Part One
GS Don Morris, Ph.D.
March 27, 2007
How many times have you wanted to say something but thought better of it? I’m not talking about being polite or executing long held social graces-I am specifically referring to withholding comments because someone might be offended by your words. You knew if you spoke you would be labeled some form of –ist, e.g., racist, sexist, and the like! You quietly bite your tongue and remain “inoffensive”, regardless of how offensive the other person’s comments are. Join the plurality of Americans who exercise political correctness every single day! According to several of our military leaders, PC is killing us around the world.1 I suggest that it is time to address head-on this polarizing and dangerous social practice.
Let’s be clear about the meaning of political correctness. No more “dodging the issue” or pretending that it does not cause harm. Here are a few definitions worth paying attention to:
• A trend that wants to make everything fair, equal and just to all by suppressing thought, speech and practice in order to achieve that goal2.
• Avoidance of expressions or actions that can be perceived to exclude, or marginalize, or insult people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against3.
• Political correctness (often abbreviated to PC) is a term used to describe language or behavior which is intended, or said to be intended, to provide a minimum of offense, particularly to racial, cultural, or other identity groups. A text that conforms to the alleged ideals of political correctness is said to be politically correct … Those who use the term in a critical fashion often express a concern about the dilution of freedom of speech, intolerance of language, and the avoidance of a discussion of social problems.
Political correctness has been with us for decades although no one is certain about its origins. For example, Barbara Epstein suggested that it was publicized after the Western Humanities Conference was held back in 19905. This was an interdisciplinary forum entitled “Political Correctness and Cultural Studies” at the University of California at Berkeley. She offered that it was initially a wry joke on the Left that became a rigid standard against which both liberals and conservatives were being measured—by themselves and by each other.
No one knows for sure when PC began and this is not an essay on the origins of political correctness. Can we at least agree that it has seeped into our daily lives as well as our institutions?
Rather than enabling open and complete discussion with regard to important issues today, just the opposite has occurred; regrettably it continues to this day. Many of us understand the dangers of PC behavior. I offer but a few of these dangers for your consideration:
• Individuals are constantly censoring their remarks and losing their freedom of speech for fear of PC repression. Do you know what happens when people withhold their concerns, upsets and beliefs over time?
• Cultural icons long held dear to Americans have come under attack; Santa was barred from a December, 2001, festival in Kennsington, Md because two families objected to the Santa icon-the erosion of cultural values and demonstration of an unwillingness to stand up for what we believe leads America down the proverbial “slippery slope”.
• Professors in our universities are attacked when they express a point of view that differs from left-leaning colleagues; critical analysis is being replaced with uni-directional criticism.
• In the workplace we see the idea of “diversity” resulting in less qualified individuals being hired while incompetent workers cannot be fired-imagine the erosion in product and service quality during the coming years.
• Criticism of terrorists, identification of their affiliation has lead to social and legal recriminations-in turn policies have been directed and implemented due to our own fear. This, repeated often enough over the next years, will erode America.
Political correctness disables a democracy and cripples its very nature. Our Western Culture is by design meant to be civilized. This manifests itself by interpersonal respect and our effort to correct injustices. Not only is it our national collective culture to embrace freedom, we have for decades demonstrated tolerance for all points of view as well. We have led the world in supporting the individual rights of all human beings rather than for a select group. Our legal system, once admired by most of the international community, was founded upon Judeo-Christian values and we were proud of this; so seems were millions of others who have flocked to our shores. These values created a culture that has produced economic, educational, and social climates that so many others also desire. However, we seem to be unable to stand up today and withstand the onslaught from our enemies who use political correctness as the divisive verbal weapon it is today.
The U.S.A. is awash with a dangerous and insidious social paradigm: the double standard of social and political will. It is time to address this concern and it will require courage. Our founding fathers would wonder why we did not stand up to the enemies of the democratic paradigm they so cleverly created over 200 years ago. They would be aghast that their names were stricken from the history standards of the New Jersey Department of Education in 2002. They would be understandably angry when middle school students in a California school were allowed to pretend they were warriors fighting for Islam but prevented from praying as a Christian or as a Jew. You can add to this insensitive list of injustices.
The challenge is before us. If one is afraid to pronounce to others what he or she believes to be true, what justice and civilized behavior should look like, it is no wonder that our policy makers become nothing more than a reflection of our fearful beliefs. Although much has been written about this culture of defeatism spurred on by ratcheting up the controlling notion of PC, it is time for us to stand up and declare war upon political correctness. Decisions in the USA and abroad have been made and that are attempting to be made are not only killing citizens but will ultimately leave a culture for our grandchildren that is anything but correct.
Part Two explores strategies for turning the tide of this path.
End Notes
1. General Tom McInerney, Intelligence Summit, St. Petersburg, Fl, March 6, 2007
2. www.information-entertainment.com/Politics/polterms.html
3. wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
4. www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness
5. Epstein, Barbara “My friend and mentor”, Slate, June 19,2006
Thank you to my editor, Chana Givon
Viewed on http://writingtw.blogspot.com/
GS Don Morris, Ph.D.
March 27, 2007
How many times have you wanted to say something but thought better of it? I’m not talking about being polite or executing long held social graces-I am specifically referring to withholding comments because someone might be offended by your words. You knew if you spoke you would be labeled some form of –ist, e.g., racist, sexist, and the like! You quietly bite your tongue and remain “inoffensive”, regardless of how offensive the other person’s comments are. Join the plurality of Americans who exercise political correctness every single day! According to several of our military leaders, PC is killing us around the world.1 I suggest that it is time to address head-on this polarizing and dangerous social practice.
Let’s be clear about the meaning of political correctness. No more “dodging the issue” or pretending that it does not cause harm. Here are a few definitions worth paying attention to:
• A trend that wants to make everything fair, equal and just to all by suppressing thought, speech and practice in order to achieve that goal2.
• Avoidance of expressions or actions that can be perceived to exclude, or marginalize, or insult people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against3.
• Political correctness (often abbreviated to PC) is a term used to describe language or behavior which is intended, or said to be intended, to provide a minimum of offense, particularly to racial, cultural, or other identity groups. A text that conforms to the alleged ideals of political correctness is said to be politically correct … Those who use the term in a critical fashion often express a concern about the dilution of freedom of speech, intolerance of language, and the avoidance of a discussion of social problems.
Political correctness has been with us for decades although no one is certain about its origins. For example, Barbara Epstein suggested that it was publicized after the Western Humanities Conference was held back in 19905. This was an interdisciplinary forum entitled “Political Correctness and Cultural Studies” at the University of California at Berkeley. She offered that it was initially a wry joke on the Left that became a rigid standard against which both liberals and conservatives were being measured—by themselves and by each other.
No one knows for sure when PC began and this is not an essay on the origins of political correctness. Can we at least agree that it has seeped into our daily lives as well as our institutions?
Rather than enabling open and complete discussion with regard to important issues today, just the opposite has occurred; regrettably it continues to this day. Many of us understand the dangers of PC behavior. I offer but a few of these dangers for your consideration:
• Individuals are constantly censoring their remarks and losing their freedom of speech for fear of PC repression. Do you know what happens when people withhold their concerns, upsets and beliefs over time?
• Cultural icons long held dear to Americans have come under attack; Santa was barred from a December, 2001, festival in Kennsington, Md because two families objected to the Santa icon-the erosion of cultural values and demonstration of an unwillingness to stand up for what we believe leads America down the proverbial “slippery slope”.
• Professors in our universities are attacked when they express a point of view that differs from left-leaning colleagues; critical analysis is being replaced with uni-directional criticism.
• In the workplace we see the idea of “diversity” resulting in less qualified individuals being hired while incompetent workers cannot be fired-imagine the erosion in product and service quality during the coming years.
• Criticism of terrorists, identification of their affiliation has lead to social and legal recriminations-in turn policies have been directed and implemented due to our own fear. This, repeated often enough over the next years, will erode America.
Political correctness disables a democracy and cripples its very nature. Our Western Culture is by design meant to be civilized. This manifests itself by interpersonal respect and our effort to correct injustices. Not only is it our national collective culture to embrace freedom, we have for decades demonstrated tolerance for all points of view as well. We have led the world in supporting the individual rights of all human beings rather than for a select group. Our legal system, once admired by most of the international community, was founded upon Judeo-Christian values and we were proud of this; so seems were millions of others who have flocked to our shores. These values created a culture that has produced economic, educational, and social climates that so many others also desire. However, we seem to be unable to stand up today and withstand the onslaught from our enemies who use political correctness as the divisive verbal weapon it is today.
The U.S.A. is awash with a dangerous and insidious social paradigm: the double standard of social and political will. It is time to address this concern and it will require courage. Our founding fathers would wonder why we did not stand up to the enemies of the democratic paradigm they so cleverly created over 200 years ago. They would be aghast that their names were stricken from the history standards of the New Jersey Department of Education in 2002. They would be understandably angry when middle school students in a California school were allowed to pretend they were warriors fighting for Islam but prevented from praying as a Christian or as a Jew. You can add to this insensitive list of injustices.
The challenge is before us. If one is afraid to pronounce to others what he or she believes to be true, what justice and civilized behavior should look like, it is no wonder that our policy makers become nothing more than a reflection of our fearful beliefs. Although much has been written about this culture of defeatism spurred on by ratcheting up the controlling notion of PC, it is time for us to stand up and declare war upon political correctness. Decisions in the USA and abroad have been made and that are attempting to be made are not only killing citizens but will ultimately leave a culture for our grandchildren that is anything but correct.
Part Two explores strategies for turning the tide of this path.
End Notes
1. General Tom McInerney, Intelligence Summit, St. Petersburg, Fl, March 6, 2007
2. www.information-entertainment.com/Politics/polterms.html
3. wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
4. www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness
5. Epstein, Barbara “My friend and mentor”, Slate, June 19,2006
Thank you to my editor, Chana Givon
Viewed on http://writingtw.blogspot.com/
Minggu, 25 Februari 2007
What Hypocrisy?
GS Don Morris, Ph.D.
February 24, 2007
Hezbollah remains on the USA’s terror list. The international community continues to support the United Nations Resolution 1701. Do you remember this resolution? In part it states the following:
“Hezbollah and other terrorist elements must be disarmed as stipulated in the Taif Accord (1989) and in the relevant Security Council resolutions. The resolution also states that the Lebanese government, with the assistance of UNIFIL, should exercise its authority across its entire territory and, within that context, to rid south Lebanon of the presence and arms of Hezbollah and the other terrorist organizations. Likewise, the resolution forbids transporting arms to Hezbollah (and the other terrorist organizations) by land, sea, and air.”
Yet, Hezzbollah, in defiance of the Lebanese government and UNIFIL (and, in fact, the entire international community), which bears the responsibility to implement the resolution ignores international law and rearms itself. It does so in physical view of UNIFIL troops.
I am not the only one who knows these facts. The media possesses this same information as does all of the international community including our very own government. Yet Israel has,once again, been condemned by the UN. Syria continues to illegally transport weapons to these terrorists, under the vigil of UNIFIL.1
On February 16, 2007, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah gave a belligerent, arrogant speech in a ceremony held in south Beirut (in the neighborhood of Al-Rawis) on the anniversary of the killing of two senior Hezbollah figures. In his speech, Nasrallah admitted that his organization was rearming and secretly smuggling arms and ammunition to south Lebanon. Here is a partial translation of his speech:
“Hezbollah is rearming: “We are being very clear and we are saying that we have arms. We are not lying and [we are] telling it to the whole world. We have arms [Nasrallah stresses the word “arms”]… of all shapes and sizes… The resistance [i.e., Hezbollah] has arms. It is saying it in public, adding that it is rearming and increasing the scope of its armament in order to get more dangerous arms…”
“Hezbollah is secretly transporting arms to the Israeli front: “The resistance [i.e., Hezbollah] notes that it is transporting the arms to the front. We do not hide it. Doing it in secret is only natural. Could we do it openly? How?... We concealed our arms because we wanted to conceal them from our enemies… We are transporting the arms in secret because it is our right… We are transporting the arms secretly and in straw trucks so as to not embarrass you [the Lebanese government]…”1
The response from the West is resounding silence. The justification is Hezbollah is the defender of Lebanon and this trumps any international order. Thus there is no behavioral action or consequence for Hezbollah’s or any other terrorist group when they thumb their nose at international law! It is not Hezbollah who is acting hypocritically, it is the international community and especially the West lead by Britain, France, Germany and the United States. As long as we do not hold accountable groups, nations or individuals professing to represent a sovereign nation, then we can never expect peace. Our behavior is one of appeasement and until we stand up to the strategy our enemies use we shall fail. They use our own legal system and our moral conscious against us and we willingly march toward the cliff of doom. Words either have meaning or they do not; until we are willing to support our words with behavioral consequences we expect all terrorist groups to use the following types of arguments against us:
“…We stress our commitment to the resistance [i.e., the way of violence and terrorism], to the cause of the resistance and to the project of the resistance that defends the homeland… I am saying that we will remain on the border, in Beirut , and everywhere in Lebanon . We are Lebanese, and this country is our country… Every clod of earth in the south is to us a drop of a shahid's blood. Every rock in the south is to us a shahid's body… Every olive tree in the south is to us the loving and sparkling soul of the jihad warriors of the resistance… and Hezbollah… is willing to wage jihad and persist with its struggle for justice in all areas…”1
For those in the West who still act as though we can dialogue and/or solve the problems of the Middle East through words, I submit it is a choice you are making to justify your lack of will and determination to stand and fight. History is repeating itself and we are none the wiser. For me, I am rapidly loosing confidence in the West’s ability to preserve its way of life for my grandchildren. Our behavior is a disgrace-what pray tell should I say to my children?
End Notes
1. February 23, 2007, Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center report
http://docstalk.blogspot.com
GS Don Morris, Ph.D.
February 24, 2007
Hezbollah remains on the USA’s terror list. The international community continues to support the United Nations Resolution 1701. Do you remember this resolution? In part it states the following:
“Hezbollah and other terrorist elements must be disarmed as stipulated in the Taif Accord (1989) and in the relevant Security Council resolutions. The resolution also states that the Lebanese government, with the assistance of UNIFIL, should exercise its authority across its entire territory and, within that context, to rid south Lebanon of the presence and arms of Hezbollah and the other terrorist organizations. Likewise, the resolution forbids transporting arms to Hezbollah (and the other terrorist organizations) by land, sea, and air.”
Yet, Hezzbollah, in defiance of the Lebanese government and UNIFIL (and, in fact, the entire international community), which bears the responsibility to implement the resolution ignores international law and rearms itself. It does so in physical view of UNIFIL troops.
I am not the only one who knows these facts. The media possesses this same information as does all of the international community including our very own government. Yet Israel has,once again, been condemned by the UN. Syria continues to illegally transport weapons to these terrorists, under the vigil of UNIFIL.1
On February 16, 2007, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah gave a belligerent, arrogant speech in a ceremony held in south Beirut (in the neighborhood of Al-Rawis) on the anniversary of the killing of two senior Hezbollah figures. In his speech, Nasrallah admitted that his organization was rearming and secretly smuggling arms and ammunition to south Lebanon. Here is a partial translation of his speech:
“Hezbollah is rearming: “We are being very clear and we are saying that we have arms. We are not lying and [we are] telling it to the whole world. We have arms [Nasrallah stresses the word “arms”]… of all shapes and sizes… The resistance [i.e., Hezbollah] has arms. It is saying it in public, adding that it is rearming and increasing the scope of its armament in order to get more dangerous arms…”
“Hezbollah is secretly transporting arms to the Israeli front: “The resistance [i.e., Hezbollah] notes that it is transporting the arms to the front. We do not hide it. Doing it in secret is only natural. Could we do it openly? How?... We concealed our arms because we wanted to conceal them from our enemies… We are transporting the arms in secret because it is our right… We are transporting the arms secretly and in straw trucks so as to not embarrass you [the Lebanese government]…”1
The response from the West is resounding silence. The justification is Hezbollah is the defender of Lebanon and this trumps any international order. Thus there is no behavioral action or consequence for Hezbollah’s or any other terrorist group when they thumb their nose at international law! It is not Hezbollah who is acting hypocritically, it is the international community and especially the West lead by Britain, France, Germany and the United States. As long as we do not hold accountable groups, nations or individuals professing to represent a sovereign nation, then we can never expect peace. Our behavior is one of appeasement and until we stand up to the strategy our enemies use we shall fail. They use our own legal system and our moral conscious against us and we willingly march toward the cliff of doom. Words either have meaning or they do not; until we are willing to support our words with behavioral consequences we expect all terrorist groups to use the following types of arguments against us:
“…We stress our commitment to the resistance [i.e., the way of violence and terrorism], to the cause of the resistance and to the project of the resistance that defends the homeland… I am saying that we will remain on the border, in Beirut , and everywhere in Lebanon . We are Lebanese, and this country is our country… Every clod of earth in the south is to us a drop of a shahid's blood. Every rock in the south is to us a shahid's body… Every olive tree in the south is to us the loving and sparkling soul of the jihad warriors of the resistance… and Hezbollah… is willing to wage jihad and persist with its struggle for justice in all areas…”1
For those in the West who still act as though we can dialogue and/or solve the problems of the Middle East through words, I submit it is a choice you are making to justify your lack of will and determination to stand and fight. History is repeating itself and we are none the wiser. For me, I am rapidly loosing confidence in the West’s ability to preserve its way of life for my grandchildren. Our behavior is a disgrace-what pray tell should I say to my children?
End Notes
1. February 23, 2007, Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center report
http://docstalk.blogspot.com
Minggu, 21 Januari 2007
Time To Gather Our Courage
by
GS Don Morris, Ph.D.
Oil and vinegar do not mix well, if at all. Ask anyone who prepares a dressing for salads-this explains why each appears in separate bottles on a dinner table. The same is conceptually applicable to politics and the truth. Case in point is the representation that the root cause of international terrorism is the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Nothing could be further from the truth; yet, nations’ policies, actions and their respective populations beliefs are based upon this misrepresentation. It is an intentional misrepresentation, our leaders know better. Examination of the facts should and can lead to the truth but it takes courage, effort and energy to learn the details.
Let us begin with the understanding that the more accurate description of the “war on terror” is the “war of values” currently engulfing much of the world today. Terror is only a tactic used by one’s enemies. The major difficulty with misrepresenting what is really going on is that the tactics, strategies and the identification of the real enemy is inadequately and improperly identified. The result is the development of unclear objectives and outcomes thus the perceived confusion of our plans to defeat our enemies. The following questions beg to be asked: Why does our government refrain from labeling the war incorrectly? What’s the payoff for the West for improper war identification? Do our elected officials still believe that we “can’t handle the truth?”
At long last one Western leader has spoken the reality of today’s war; Tony Blair has written the following:
“In my view, the situation we face is indeed war, but of a completely unconventional kind, one that cannot be won in a conventional way. We will not win the battle against global extremism unless we win it at the level of values as much as that of force. We can win only by showing that our values are stronger, better, and more just than the alternative.”1
The Prime Minister of England has gone where other Western leaders have chosen not to go-he offers the truth.
“The roots of the current wave of global terrorism and extremism are deep. They reach down through decades of alienation, victimhood, and political oppression in the Arab and Muslim world.”1
Prime Minister Blair argues that religious radicalism was made respectable in the minds of many people within and outside the Islamic religion. He suggests that the Muslim Brotherhood, supported by Wahhabi extremists, coupled with teaching in madrasahs in the Middle East and Asia developed and then exported an ideology of hatred and intolerance across the internal arena. The result has been an attack upon the West and its values! There are others who argue that Mr. Blair’s interpretation of current Islamic events is incomplete. In a recently published book, Mr. Gregory Davis offers the following:
“It is crucial to understand that Islam’s division of the word into the House of Islam and the House of War is not merely a question of practice but of principle. In the Islamic worldview, Sharia law is the only legitimate means of organizing society; any other social or political system violates the edicts of Allah himself.”2
The author provides a litany of data and documented facts to support his point of view. This belief is currently manifesting itself across the entire planet. War has been declared. Their believers have massed an international “army” funded by a multiple of nations in several geographic parts of the world. It is beyond time to acknowledge that this is occurring, that they are not reticent in their use of multiple tactics and strategies. Their objective is clear: eliminate the West, its vales and all it stands for; replace it with a political, social and religious doctrine contrary to what we hold dear. The composition of this war is unlike anything we have experienced and/or understand in the last several hundreds of years. To not recognize and acknowledge this leads nations, societies and individuals to make incorrect assumptions, hold invalid beliefs and ultimately to incorrectly identify our enemy. If you have incorrectly identified your enemy, you develop tactics that are doomed to failure. This failure leads to societal unrest, acquisition of beliefs that your leaders have lied to you, the development of appeasement strategies that ultimately deny the energy, efforts and courage to persevere. This is happening today in the West.
Our enemies are using a comprehensive plan against us. Components of this plan include:
• revisionist history
• intentional misrepresentation of the facts “on the ground”
• recruiting a fifth column within most of the Western countries
• funding, building and promotion of Islamic mosques inside these same Western countries designed to promote a particular anti-western rhetoric
• formation of social, educational and political groups espousing values contrary to ours
• holding the West hostage to oil supplies
• blaming others for the world’s unrest
• initiating and funding war behavior and attacking Western institutions and populations
• using the media to promote its goals through sophisticated information dissemination techniques
This is an incomplete list but it does demonstrate the new war plan that is upon all of us. Note that this is not our “parents’ kind of war”, it is cleverly crafted to utilize the Achilles heel of western democracies against us. The result has been: disbelief, emerging discontent, distrust of leaders, use of guilt and divide and conquer techniques. Regrettably we have begun a stage of acquiescence.
Here are but two examples of the preceding. A former USA President, Jimmy Carter, has been promoting his latest book. In it he says the cause of all the world’s problems is the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. This book is replete with revisionist history, misrepresentation of facts and improperly drawn conclusions. As USA Congressman Mark Kirk recently presented to Congress the following errors in Mr. Carter’s book:
• #1: On page 62, President Carter quotes Yasser Arafat as telling him, "The Palestine Liberation Organization has never advocated the annihilation of Israel ." No evidence is provided and the book does not contain one footnote.
• Fact check: Article 22 of the PLO's Charter stated that "the liberation of Palestine will destroy the Zio nist and imperialist presence." Yasser Arafat supported this charter and lied to President Carter.
• #2: On page 215, President Carter writes that one option for Israel is "withdrawal to the 1967 border as specified in U.N. Resolution 242."
• Fact check: U.N. Security Council Resolution 242 does not define a border.
These are only two examples of misrepresentation and the Congressman concludes his testimony with this profound and important statement:
“Madame Speaker, these errors diminish the credibility of President Carter's book. President Carter is entitled to his own opinions, but not his own facts.
The errors I present here are only a sampling of those included in the book. Now in the twilight of his career and with many at the Carter Center resigning their posts, President Carter should recall this book and hire competent assistants to ensure his future work does not reflect poor scholarship.”3
As a resident in the Middle East I can report how our enemies utilize the words of a former USA President to embolden their respective populations and they use these words here, within our own borders. Is it any wonder that our national resolve is currently being undermined?
One final expose of our enemies’ techniques is offered. The most prevalent explanation for international terrorism and frankly its root cause is the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Not only does this resonate with residents in Arab countries, it also receives reverberates within the entire Islamic international community and now is the mantra heard inside our Western countries. It is simply not true! Yoram Ettinger has provided an enlightening report, the following represent but a few of the conclusions.4
1. ISLAMIC TERRORISM HAS BEEN A MIDEAST FIXTURE since the seventh century, when three of the first four Caliphs, succeeding the Prophet Muhammad, were murdered by political rivals: Umar ibn Abd al-Khattab (644AD), Uthman Ibn Affan (656AD) and Ali ibn Abi Talib (661AD).
2. ANTI-WESTERN ISLAMIC TERRORISM dates back to the basic Muslim legal/theological view of the struggle between the Abode of Islam (Dar A-Salam) against the Abode of War-Sword-Infidels (Dar al-Kharb).
3. SCAPEGOATISM HAS TARGETED THE USA, the West and the Jewish State as scapegoats for Arab/Muslim frustration, humiliation and rage over the failure to reclaim the splendor of ancient Islamic dominance.
4. IRRESPECTIVE OF ISRAEL'S EXISTENCE AND THE PALESTINIAN ISSUE, Islamic terrorism has recently plagued Australia, Philippines, Thailand, Indonesia, India, Sri Lanka, Russia, Lebanon, Egypt, Sudan, Somalia, Mauritania, Nigeria, Turkey, Scandinavia, Holland, France, England, Spain, the US, etc.
You do not need to believe me; I finish this piece with words from Professor Fouad Ajami of John Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies:
“No American diplomatic scheme would spare America the fury of those bent upon eradicating its presence in the region. It is a false reading of a large civilization to say that the terror springs from the impasse between Israelis and Palestinians... It springs from deeper social, economic and political pressures within Mideast society, from the traumas of dislocated newly urbanized youth...Some of it is hatched by merciless men for whom terror is a profession that pays... It does not advance peace between Israelis and Palestinians to pretend that it would solve a problem much larger than their conflict..." (NY Times, April 17, 1986).
We are not engaged in a war on terrorism, we are in a war for our very future and survival. It is time to have the courage to shift the commentary that I believe is leading us to defeat. I join the growing number of individuals here and abroad who are redressing those who are our enemies. The question becomes, what kind of world do you want your children and grandchildren to inherit from us?
End Points
1. Blair, Tony, “A Battle for Global Values”, Foreign Affairs, January/February 2007, reported January 15, 2007.
2. Davis, Gregory, “A Religion of Peace”, World Ahead Pub., 2006.
3. Kirk,Mark Steven, “Peace Not Apartheid: More Fiction Than Fact”, testimony before the USA Congress, reported January 18,2007
4. Ettinger, Yoram, “Expose of the Israeli-Palestinian Claim to Being the Root Cause of Terror”, Straight From the Jerusalem Cloakroom, 201st issue, received January 20,2007
Posted on: http://docstalk.blogspot.com/
Posted also on PRIMER http://primerct.org
by
GS Don Morris, Ph.D.
Oil and vinegar do not mix well, if at all. Ask anyone who prepares a dressing for salads-this explains why each appears in separate bottles on a dinner table. The same is conceptually applicable to politics and the truth. Case in point is the representation that the root cause of international terrorism is the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Nothing could be further from the truth; yet, nations’ policies, actions and their respective populations beliefs are based upon this misrepresentation. It is an intentional misrepresentation, our leaders know better. Examination of the facts should and can lead to the truth but it takes courage, effort and energy to learn the details.
Let us begin with the understanding that the more accurate description of the “war on terror” is the “war of values” currently engulfing much of the world today. Terror is only a tactic used by one’s enemies. The major difficulty with misrepresenting what is really going on is that the tactics, strategies and the identification of the real enemy is inadequately and improperly identified. The result is the development of unclear objectives and outcomes thus the perceived confusion of our plans to defeat our enemies. The following questions beg to be asked: Why does our government refrain from labeling the war incorrectly? What’s the payoff for the West for improper war identification? Do our elected officials still believe that we “can’t handle the truth?”
At long last one Western leader has spoken the reality of today’s war; Tony Blair has written the following:
“In my view, the situation we face is indeed war, but of a completely unconventional kind, one that cannot be won in a conventional way. We will not win the battle against global extremism unless we win it at the level of values as much as that of force. We can win only by showing that our values are stronger, better, and more just than the alternative.”1
The Prime Minister of England has gone where other Western leaders have chosen not to go-he offers the truth.
“The roots of the current wave of global terrorism and extremism are deep. They reach down through decades of alienation, victimhood, and political oppression in the Arab and Muslim world.”1
Prime Minister Blair argues that religious radicalism was made respectable in the minds of many people within and outside the Islamic religion. He suggests that the Muslim Brotherhood, supported by Wahhabi extremists, coupled with teaching in madrasahs in the Middle East and Asia developed and then exported an ideology of hatred and intolerance across the internal arena. The result has been an attack upon the West and its values! There are others who argue that Mr. Blair’s interpretation of current Islamic events is incomplete. In a recently published book, Mr. Gregory Davis offers the following:
“It is crucial to understand that Islam’s division of the word into the House of Islam and the House of War is not merely a question of practice but of principle. In the Islamic worldview, Sharia law is the only legitimate means of organizing society; any other social or political system violates the edicts of Allah himself.”2
The author provides a litany of data and documented facts to support his point of view. This belief is currently manifesting itself across the entire planet. War has been declared. Their believers have massed an international “army” funded by a multiple of nations in several geographic parts of the world. It is beyond time to acknowledge that this is occurring, that they are not reticent in their use of multiple tactics and strategies. Their objective is clear: eliminate the West, its vales and all it stands for; replace it with a political, social and religious doctrine contrary to what we hold dear. The composition of this war is unlike anything we have experienced and/or understand in the last several hundreds of years. To not recognize and acknowledge this leads nations, societies and individuals to make incorrect assumptions, hold invalid beliefs and ultimately to incorrectly identify our enemy. If you have incorrectly identified your enemy, you develop tactics that are doomed to failure. This failure leads to societal unrest, acquisition of beliefs that your leaders have lied to you, the development of appeasement strategies that ultimately deny the energy, efforts and courage to persevere. This is happening today in the West.
Our enemies are using a comprehensive plan against us. Components of this plan include:
• revisionist history
• intentional misrepresentation of the facts “on the ground”
• recruiting a fifth column within most of the Western countries
• funding, building and promotion of Islamic mosques inside these same Western countries designed to promote a particular anti-western rhetoric
• formation of social, educational and political groups espousing values contrary to ours
• holding the West hostage to oil supplies
• blaming others for the world’s unrest
• initiating and funding war behavior and attacking Western institutions and populations
• using the media to promote its goals through sophisticated information dissemination techniques
This is an incomplete list but it does demonstrate the new war plan that is upon all of us. Note that this is not our “parents’ kind of war”, it is cleverly crafted to utilize the Achilles heel of western democracies against us. The result has been: disbelief, emerging discontent, distrust of leaders, use of guilt and divide and conquer techniques. Regrettably we have begun a stage of acquiescence.
Here are but two examples of the preceding. A former USA President, Jimmy Carter, has been promoting his latest book. In it he says the cause of all the world’s problems is the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. This book is replete with revisionist history, misrepresentation of facts and improperly drawn conclusions. As USA Congressman Mark Kirk recently presented to Congress the following errors in Mr. Carter’s book:
• #1: On page 62, President Carter quotes Yasser Arafat as telling him, "The Palestine Liberation Organization has never advocated the annihilation of Israel ." No evidence is provided and the book does not contain one footnote.
• Fact check: Article 22 of the PLO's Charter stated that "the liberation of Palestine will destroy the Zio nist and imperialist presence." Yasser Arafat supported this charter and lied to President Carter.
• #2: On page 215, President Carter writes that one option for Israel is "withdrawal to the 1967 border as specified in U.N. Resolution 242."
• Fact check: U.N. Security Council Resolution 242 does not define a border.
These are only two examples of misrepresentation and the Congressman concludes his testimony with this profound and important statement:
“Madame Speaker, these errors diminish the credibility of President Carter's book. President Carter is entitled to his own opinions, but not his own facts.
The errors I present here are only a sampling of those included in the book. Now in the twilight of his career and with many at the Carter Center resigning their posts, President Carter should recall this book and hire competent assistants to ensure his future work does not reflect poor scholarship.”3
As a resident in the Middle East I can report how our enemies utilize the words of a former USA President to embolden their respective populations and they use these words here, within our own borders. Is it any wonder that our national resolve is currently being undermined?
One final expose of our enemies’ techniques is offered. The most prevalent explanation for international terrorism and frankly its root cause is the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. Not only does this resonate with residents in Arab countries, it also receives reverberates within the entire Islamic international community and now is the mantra heard inside our Western countries. It is simply not true! Yoram Ettinger has provided an enlightening report, the following represent but a few of the conclusions.4
1. ISLAMIC TERRORISM HAS BEEN A MIDEAST FIXTURE since the seventh century, when three of the first four Caliphs, succeeding the Prophet Muhammad, were murdered by political rivals: Umar ibn Abd al-Khattab (644AD), Uthman Ibn Affan (656AD) and Ali ibn Abi Talib (661AD).
2. ANTI-WESTERN ISLAMIC TERRORISM dates back to the basic Muslim legal/theological view of the struggle between the Abode of Islam (Dar A-Salam) against the Abode of War-Sword-Infidels (Dar al-Kharb).
3. SCAPEGOATISM HAS TARGETED THE USA, the West and the Jewish State as scapegoats for Arab/Muslim frustration, humiliation and rage over the failure to reclaim the splendor of ancient Islamic dominance.
4. IRRESPECTIVE OF ISRAEL'S EXISTENCE AND THE PALESTINIAN ISSUE, Islamic terrorism has recently plagued Australia, Philippines, Thailand, Indonesia, India, Sri Lanka, Russia, Lebanon, Egypt, Sudan, Somalia, Mauritania, Nigeria, Turkey, Scandinavia, Holland, France, England, Spain, the US, etc.
You do not need to believe me; I finish this piece with words from Professor Fouad Ajami of John Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies:
“No American diplomatic scheme would spare America the fury of those bent upon eradicating its presence in the region. It is a false reading of a large civilization to say that the terror springs from the impasse between Israelis and Palestinians... It springs from deeper social, economic and political pressures within Mideast society, from the traumas of dislocated newly urbanized youth...Some of it is hatched by merciless men for whom terror is a profession that pays... It does not advance peace between Israelis and Palestinians to pretend that it would solve a problem much larger than their conflict..." (NY Times, April 17, 1986).
We are not engaged in a war on terrorism, we are in a war for our very future and survival. It is time to have the courage to shift the commentary that I believe is leading us to defeat. I join the growing number of individuals here and abroad who are redressing those who are our enemies. The question becomes, what kind of world do you want your children and grandchildren to inherit from us?
End Points
1. Blair, Tony, “A Battle for Global Values”, Foreign Affairs, January/February 2007, reported January 15, 2007.
2. Davis, Gregory, “A Religion of Peace”, World Ahead Pub., 2006.
3. Kirk,Mark Steven, “Peace Not Apartheid: More Fiction Than Fact”, testimony before the USA Congress, reported January 18,2007
4. Ettinger, Yoram, “Expose of the Israeli-Palestinian Claim to Being the Root Cause of Terror”, Straight From the Jerusalem Cloakroom, 201st issue, received January 20,2007
Posted on: http://docstalk.blogspot.com/
Posted also on PRIMER http://primerct.org
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)