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
Minggu, 25 Februari 2007
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
Kamis, 18 Januari 2007
I was recently forwarded a Craig R. Smith article entitled “Made in the USA: Spoiled Brats.
Discontented?
The Newsweek poll alleges that 67% of Americans are unhappy with the direction the country is headed and 69% of the country is unhappy with the performance of the president. In essence 2/3 of the citizenry just
ain't happy and want a change.
So being the knuckle dragger I am, I starting thinking, ''What are we so unhappy about?'' Is it that we have electricity and running water 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? Is our unhappiness the result of having air conditioning in the summer and heating in the winter? Could it be that 95.4% of these unhappy folks have a job? Maybe it is the ability to walk into a grocery store at any time and see more food in moments than Darfur has seen in the last year?
Maybe it is the ability to drive from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean without having to present identification papers as we move through each state? Or possibly the hundreds of clean and safe motels we would find along the way that can provide temporary shelter? I guess having thousands of restaurants with varying cuisine from around the world is just not good enough. Or could it be that when we wreck our car, emergency workers show up and provide services to help all involved.
Whether you are rich or poor they treat your wounds and even, if necessary, send a helicopter to take you to the hospital.
Perhaps you are one of the 70% of Americans who own a home, you may be upset with knowing that in the unfortunate case of having a fire, a group of trained firefighters will appear in moments and use top notch equipment to extinguish the flames thus saving you, your family and your belongings. Or if, while at home watching one of your many flat screen TVs, a burglar or prowler intrudes; an officer equipped with a gun and a bullet-proof vest will come to defend you and your family against attack or loss. This all in the backdrop of a neighborhood free of bombs or militias raping and pillaging the residents. Neighborhoods where 90% of teenagers own cell phones and computers.
How about the complete religious, social and political freedoms we enjoy that are the envy of everyone in the world? Maybe that is what has 67% of you folks unhappy.
Fact is, we are the largest group of ungrateful, spoiled brats the world has ever seen. No wonder the world loves the U.S. yet has a great disdain for its citizens. They see us for what we are. The most blessed people in the world who do nothing but complain about what we don't have and what we hate about the country instead of thanking the good Lord we live here.
I know, I know. What about the president who took us into war and has no plan to get us out? The president who has a measly 31% approval rating?
Is this the same president who guided the nation in the dark days after 9/11?
The president that cut taxes to bring an economy out of recession? Could this be the same guy who has been called every name in the book for succeeding in keeping all the spoiled brats safe from terrorist attacks?
The commander is chief of an all-volunteer army that is out there defending you and me?
Make no mistake about it. The troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have volunteered to serve, and in many cases have died for your freedom.
There is currently no draft in this country. They didn't have to go. They are able to refuse to go and end up with either a ''general'' discharge, an ''other than honorable'' discharge or, worst case scenario, a ''dishonorable'' discharge after a few days in the brig.
So why then the flat out discontentment in the minds of 69% of Americans?
Say what you want but I blame it on the media. If it bleeds, it leads, and they specialize in bad news. Everybody will watch a car crash with blood and guts. How many will watch kids selling lemonade at the corner?
The media knows this and media outlets are for-profit corporations.
They offer what sells. Just ask why they were going to allow a murderer like O.J. Simpson to write a book and do a TV special about how he didn't kill his wife but if he did, how he would do it. Insane!
Stop buying the negative venom you are fed everyday by the media. Shut off the TV, burn Newsweek, and use the New York Times for the bottom of your birdcage. Then start being grateful for all we have as a country.
There is exponentially more good than bad.
I close with one of my favorite quotes from B.C. Forbes in 1953:
''What have Americans to be thankful for? More than any other people on the earth, we enjoy complete religious freedom, political freedom, and social freedom. Our liberties are sacredly safeguarded by the Constitution of the United States, 'the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man.' Yes, we Americans of today have been bequeathed a noble heritage. Let us pray that we may hand it down unsullied to our children and theirs.'' I suggest we sit back and count our blessings for all we have. If we don't, what we have will be taken away. Then we will have to explain to future generations why we squandered such blessing and abundance. If we are not careful this generation will be known as the ''greediest and most ungrateful generation.'' A far cry from the proud Americans of the ''greatest generation'' who left us an untarnished legacy.
Made in the USA: Spoiled brats
Posted: November 20, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Craig R. Smith
© 2006
The other day I was reading Newsweek magazine and came across some poll data I found rather hard to believe. It must be true given the source, right? The same magazine that employs Michael (Qurans in the toilets at Gitmo) Isikoff. Here I promised myself this week I would be nice and I start off in this way. Oh what a mean man I am.
The Newsweek poll alleges that 67 percent of Americans are unhappy with the direction the country is headed and 69 percent of the country is unhappy with the performance of the president. In essence 2/3s of the citizenry just ain't happy and want a change.
So being the knuckle dragger I am, I starting thinking, ''What we are so unhappy about?''
(Column continues below)
Is it that we have electricity and running water 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? Is our unhappiness the result of having air conditioning in the summer and heating in the winter? Could it be that 95.4 percent of these unhappy folks have a job? Maybe it is the ability to walk into a grocery store at any time and see more food in moments than Darfur has seen in the last year?
Maybe it is the ability to drive from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean without having to present identification papers as we move through each state? Or possibly the hundreds of clean and safe motels we would find along the way that can provide temporary shelter? I guess having thousands of restaurants with varying cuisine from around the world is just not good enough. Or could it be that when we wreck our car, emergency workers show up and provide services to help all involved. Whether you are rich or poor they treat your wounds and even, if necessary, send a helicopter to take you to the hospital.
Perhaps you are one of the 70 percent of Americans who own a home, you may be upset with knowing that in the unfortunate case of having a fire, a group of trained firefighters will appear in moments and use top notch equipment to extinguish the flames thus saving you, your family and your belongings. Or if, while at home watching one of your many flat screen TVs, a burglar or prowler intrudes; an officer equipped with a gun and a bullet-proof vest will come to defend you and your family against attack or loss. This all in the backdrop of a neighborhood free of bombs or militias raping and pillaging the residents. Neighborhoods where 90 percent of teenagers own cell phones and computers.
How about the complete religious, social and political freedoms we enjoy that are the envy of everyone in the world? Maybe that is what has 67 percent of you folks unhappy.
Fact is, we are the largest group of ungrateful, spoiled brats the world has ever seen. No wonder the world loves the U.S. yet has a great disdain for its citizens. They see us for what we are. The most blessed people in the world who do nothing but complain about what we don't have and what we hate about the country instead of thanking the good Lord we live here.
I know, I know. What about the president who took us into war and has no plan to get us out? The president who has a measly 31 percent approval rating? Is this the same president who guided the nation in the dark days after 9/11? The president that cut taxes to bring an economy out of recession? Could this be the same guy who has been called every name in the book for succeeding in keeping all the spoiled brats safe from terrorist attacks? The commander in chief of an all-volunteer army that is out there defending you and me?
Make no mistake about it. The troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have volunteered to serve, and in many cases have died for your freedom. There is currently no draft in this country. They didn't have to go. They are able to refuse to go and end up with either a ''general'' discharge, an ''other than honorable'' discharge or, worst case scenario, a ''dishonorable'' discharge after a few days in the brig.
So why then the flat out discontentment in the minds of 69 percent of Americans? Say what you want but I blame it on the media. If it bleeds it leads and they specialize in bad news. Everybody will watch a car crash with blood and guts. How many will watch kids selling lemonade at the corner? The media knows this and media outlets are for-profit corporations. They offer what sells. Just ask why they are going to allow a murderer like O.J. Simpson to write a book and do a TV special about how he didn't kill his wife but if he did … insane!
Stop buying the negative venom you are fed everyday by the media. Shut off the TV, burn Newsweek, and use the New York Times for the bottom of your bird cage. Then start being grateful for all we have as a country. There is exponentially more good than bad.
I close with one of my favorite quotes from B.C. Forbes in 1953:
''What have Americans to be thankful for? More than any other people on the earth, we enjoy complete religious freedom, political freedom, social freedom. Our liberties are sacredly safeguarded by the Constitution of the United States, 'the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man.' Yes, we Americans of today have been bequeathed a noble heritage. Let us pray that we may hand it down unsullied to our children and theirs.''
I suggest this Thanksgiving we sit back and count our blessings for all we have. If we don't, what we have will be taken away. Then we will have to explain to future generations why we squandered such blessing and abundance. If we are not careful this generation will be known as the ''greediest and most ungrateful generation.'' A far cry from the proud Americans of the ''greatest generation'' who left us an untarnished legacy.
Related offer:
'Finest video ever produced' about USA. 'Upbeat, unforgettable evening of entertainment. Feel good about America again'
Craig R. Smith is an author, commentator and popular media guest because he instantly engages audiences with his common-sense analyses of local, national and global trends. Serving as CEO of Swiss America for nearly 25 years, Craig understands that Americans want solid answers to the tough questions and that real leadership begins with servanthood. Craig's most recent book is "Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics of Oil," which he co-authored with WND columnist Jerome R. Corsi. For media interviews please call Holly at 800-950-2428.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53028
Discontented?
The Newsweek poll alleges that 67% of Americans are unhappy with the direction the country is headed and 69% of the country is unhappy with the performance of the president. In essence 2/3 of the citizenry just
ain't happy and want a change.
So being the knuckle dragger I am, I starting thinking, ''What are we so unhappy about?'' Is it that we have electricity and running water 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? Is our unhappiness the result of having air conditioning in the summer and heating in the winter? Could it be that 95.4% of these unhappy folks have a job? Maybe it is the ability to walk into a grocery store at any time and see more food in moments than Darfur has seen in the last year?
Maybe it is the ability to drive from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean without having to present identification papers as we move through each state? Or possibly the hundreds of clean and safe motels we would find along the way that can provide temporary shelter? I guess having thousands of restaurants with varying cuisine from around the world is just not good enough. Or could it be that when we wreck our car, emergency workers show up and provide services to help all involved.
Whether you are rich or poor they treat your wounds and even, if necessary, send a helicopter to take you to the hospital.
Perhaps you are one of the 70% of Americans who own a home, you may be upset with knowing that in the unfortunate case of having a fire, a group of trained firefighters will appear in moments and use top notch equipment to extinguish the flames thus saving you, your family and your belongings. Or if, while at home watching one of your many flat screen TVs, a burglar or prowler intrudes; an officer equipped with a gun and a bullet-proof vest will come to defend you and your family against attack or loss. This all in the backdrop of a neighborhood free of bombs or militias raping and pillaging the residents. Neighborhoods where 90% of teenagers own cell phones and computers.
How about the complete religious, social and political freedoms we enjoy that are the envy of everyone in the world? Maybe that is what has 67% of you folks unhappy.
Fact is, we are the largest group of ungrateful, spoiled brats the world has ever seen. No wonder the world loves the U.S. yet has a great disdain for its citizens. They see us for what we are. The most blessed people in the world who do nothing but complain about what we don't have and what we hate about the country instead of thanking the good Lord we live here.
I know, I know. What about the president who took us into war and has no plan to get us out? The president who has a measly 31% approval rating?
Is this the same president who guided the nation in the dark days after 9/11?
The president that cut taxes to bring an economy out of recession? Could this be the same guy who has been called every name in the book for succeeding in keeping all the spoiled brats safe from terrorist attacks?
The commander is chief of an all-volunteer army that is out there defending you and me?
Make no mistake about it. The troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have volunteered to serve, and in many cases have died for your freedom.
There is currently no draft in this country. They didn't have to go. They are able to refuse to go and end up with either a ''general'' discharge, an ''other than honorable'' discharge or, worst case scenario, a ''dishonorable'' discharge after a few days in the brig.
So why then the flat out discontentment in the minds of 69% of Americans?
Say what you want but I blame it on the media. If it bleeds, it leads, and they specialize in bad news. Everybody will watch a car crash with blood and guts. How many will watch kids selling lemonade at the corner?
The media knows this and media outlets are for-profit corporations.
They offer what sells. Just ask why they were going to allow a murderer like O.J. Simpson to write a book and do a TV special about how he didn't kill his wife but if he did, how he would do it. Insane!
Stop buying the negative venom you are fed everyday by the media. Shut off the TV, burn Newsweek, and use the New York Times for the bottom of your birdcage. Then start being grateful for all we have as a country.
There is exponentially more good than bad.
I close with one of my favorite quotes from B.C. Forbes in 1953:
''What have Americans to be thankful for? More than any other people on the earth, we enjoy complete religious freedom, political freedom, and social freedom. Our liberties are sacredly safeguarded by the Constitution of the United States, 'the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man.' Yes, we Americans of today have been bequeathed a noble heritage. Let us pray that we may hand it down unsullied to our children and theirs.'' I suggest we sit back and count our blessings for all we have. If we don't, what we have will be taken away. Then we will have to explain to future generations why we squandered such blessing and abundance. If we are not careful this generation will be known as the ''greediest and most ungrateful generation.'' A far cry from the proud Americans of the ''greatest generation'' who left us an untarnished legacy.
Made in the USA: Spoiled brats
Posted: November 20, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Craig R. Smith
© 2006
The other day I was reading Newsweek magazine and came across some poll data I found rather hard to believe. It must be true given the source, right? The same magazine that employs Michael (Qurans in the toilets at Gitmo) Isikoff. Here I promised myself this week I would be nice and I start off in this way. Oh what a mean man I am.
The Newsweek poll alleges that 67 percent of Americans are unhappy with the direction the country is headed and 69 percent of the country is unhappy with the performance of the president. In essence 2/3s of the citizenry just ain't happy and want a change.
So being the knuckle dragger I am, I starting thinking, ''What we are so unhappy about?''
(Column continues below)
Is it that we have electricity and running water 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? Is our unhappiness the result of having air conditioning in the summer and heating in the winter? Could it be that 95.4 percent of these unhappy folks have a job? Maybe it is the ability to walk into a grocery store at any time and see more food in moments than Darfur has seen in the last year?
Maybe it is the ability to drive from the Pacific Ocean to the Atlantic Ocean without having to present identification papers as we move through each state? Or possibly the hundreds of clean and safe motels we would find along the way that can provide temporary shelter? I guess having thousands of restaurants with varying cuisine from around the world is just not good enough. Or could it be that when we wreck our car, emergency workers show up and provide services to help all involved. Whether you are rich or poor they treat your wounds and even, if necessary, send a helicopter to take you to the hospital.
Perhaps you are one of the 70 percent of Americans who own a home, you may be upset with knowing that in the unfortunate case of having a fire, a group of trained firefighters will appear in moments and use top notch equipment to extinguish the flames thus saving you, your family and your belongings. Or if, while at home watching one of your many flat screen TVs, a burglar or prowler intrudes; an officer equipped with a gun and a bullet-proof vest will come to defend you and your family against attack or loss. This all in the backdrop of a neighborhood free of bombs or militias raping and pillaging the residents. Neighborhoods where 90 percent of teenagers own cell phones and computers.
How about the complete religious, social and political freedoms we enjoy that are the envy of everyone in the world? Maybe that is what has 67 percent of you folks unhappy.
Fact is, we are the largest group of ungrateful, spoiled brats the world has ever seen. No wonder the world loves the U.S. yet has a great disdain for its citizens. They see us for what we are. The most blessed people in the world who do nothing but complain about what we don't have and what we hate about the country instead of thanking the good Lord we live here.
I know, I know. What about the president who took us into war and has no plan to get us out? The president who has a measly 31 percent approval rating? Is this the same president who guided the nation in the dark days after 9/11? The president that cut taxes to bring an economy out of recession? Could this be the same guy who has been called every name in the book for succeeding in keeping all the spoiled brats safe from terrorist attacks? The commander in chief of an all-volunteer army that is out there defending you and me?
Make no mistake about it. The troops in Iraq and Afghanistan have volunteered to serve, and in many cases have died for your freedom. There is currently no draft in this country. They didn't have to go. They are able to refuse to go and end up with either a ''general'' discharge, an ''other than honorable'' discharge or, worst case scenario, a ''dishonorable'' discharge after a few days in the brig.
So why then the flat out discontentment in the minds of 69 percent of Americans? Say what you want but I blame it on the media. If it bleeds it leads and they specialize in bad news. Everybody will watch a car crash with blood and guts. How many will watch kids selling lemonade at the corner? The media knows this and media outlets are for-profit corporations. They offer what sells. Just ask why they are going to allow a murderer like O.J. Simpson to write a book and do a TV special about how he didn't kill his wife but if he did … insane!
Stop buying the negative venom you are fed everyday by the media. Shut off the TV, burn Newsweek, and use the New York Times for the bottom of your bird cage. Then start being grateful for all we have as a country. There is exponentially more good than bad.
I close with one of my favorite quotes from B.C. Forbes in 1953:
''What have Americans to be thankful for? More than any other people on the earth, we enjoy complete religious freedom, political freedom, social freedom. Our liberties are sacredly safeguarded by the Constitution of the United States, 'the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man.' Yes, we Americans of today have been bequeathed a noble heritage. Let us pray that we may hand it down unsullied to our children and theirs.''
I suggest this Thanksgiving we sit back and count our blessings for all we have. If we don't, what we have will be taken away. Then we will have to explain to future generations why we squandered such blessing and abundance. If we are not careful this generation will be known as the ''greediest and most ungrateful generation.'' A far cry from the proud Americans of the ''greatest generation'' who left us an untarnished legacy.
Related offer:
'Finest video ever produced' about USA. 'Upbeat, unforgettable evening of entertainment. Feel good about America again'
Craig R. Smith is an author, commentator and popular media guest because he instantly engages audiences with his common-sense analyses of local, national and global trends. Serving as CEO of Swiss America for nearly 25 years, Craig understands that Americans want solid answers to the tough questions and that real leadership begins with servanthood. Craig's most recent book is "Black Gold Stranglehold: The Myth of Scarcity and the Politics of Oil," which he co-authored with WND columnist Jerome R. Corsi. For media interviews please call Holly at 800-950-2428.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53028
Senin, 27 November 2006
Flawed Conclusions by the United Nations-Again!
GS Don Morris, Ph.d.
Upon awaking the day after Thanksgiving, a day of reflection and peaceful gratitude for all we have, I was once again jolted back to reality here in Israel. As is my custom, I turned on my computer and started reading the local and international newspapers on line. The following headline reminded me, again, why I believe that the United Nations has lost its moral compass together with its ability to address the Middle East with any degree of ethical behavior. The headline read, “Israel may be more to blame than Hizbullah”, and I was informed that we, Israel, were the dastardly breakers of all that is humanely deceit and should receive the blame over a terrorist group called Hizzbollah1. The UN High Commissioner, for Human Rights, Louise Arbour, told me this and if I did not know the truth or the facts I certainly must believe the Commissioner for Human Rights2.
Allow me to suggest that a person who holds such a position must understand the responsibility associated with drawing conclusions after complete facts are known and analyzed. Furthermore, this person must consider the entire context in which specific actions were conducted.
Juxtaposed against the preceding headline was another one I remember: “IDF set for massive assault on Lebanon-eight soldiers killed, two kidnapped in Hizzbollah attack on northern border”, July 13,2006, Jerusalem Post. The facts shall set you free, unless you are associated with the United Nations. Israel was attacked by an international terrorist group-it was an unprovoked attacked-we immediately lost eight young people and to this day our kidnapped soldiers have not only never been heard of since this day, there is no public conversation of their return. Concomitant with these acts, Hizzbollah began firing dozens of missiles into Israel proper aimed precisely at non-military targets. They aimed their rockets of death at our northern civilian population. Most other countries would consider this cumulative behavior as an act of war. Israel did what any other nation would do-we decided to return fire and action-we went after our men. We did this to also protect one million of our citizens who were now directly in harm’s way.
To deny any of this is to distort, misrepresent and lie to the world community. A war had begun and it lasted for over one month. Within this framework of understanding battles ensued and with any war there was collateral damage. It is at this point that one can begin to discuss the operational and therefore intentional behavior of both sides in this war. Hizzbollah used the Lebanese population as human shields. Not only did it store munitions, rockets, missiles and terrorists within civilian neighborhoods, it continued the “blending process” by dressing as the local population. It used civilian homes as missile launch sites. It held at gunpoint Lebanese who tried to leave their own neighborhoods in order to find safe havens away from the Hizzbollah enemy of Israel. It even shot some citizens of Lebanon for trying to escape. Need I state the obvious? Not only are all of these actions intentional, they are illegal by any Western legal authority, including the Geneva Convention.
Israel has the most stringent “rules of engagement” of any Western military operating today. It is against these rules, it is illegal by Israeli law and it is against all Judaic practices and principles to intentionally target civilians. Yes, in war either by technical error, tactical mistake or by simply plain old bad luck civilians are killed. Does any one remember the number of British civilians killed on a daily basis during WWII?
So we arrive at the apex of this piece. Hizzbollah, international identified terrorist group, attacks without provocation the only democracy in the Middle East. Its operational standards and rules of engagement are to murder or maim as many civilians as possible, use human shields and blend in with the local population. It is no wonder that the media erroneously reported, day after day, that “innocent Lebanese civilians” were killed-you see, they counted Hizzbollah terrorists as civilians.
I am not the only one who understands and knows all of this. It is therefore shameful for a UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour to arrive at the conclusion that Israel is more to blame than Hizzbollah in the summer war. Try to follow her logic-this from an educated and highly decorated civilian now serving the United Nations.
She begins by responding to this question: “if there was a distinction under human rights law between missile attacks aimed at killing civilians and military strikes in which civilians are unintentionally killed, Arbour said the two could not be equated. Note she acknowledges that they cannot be equated.
Her explanation defies logic: "In one case you could have, for instance, a very objectionable intent - the intent to harm civilians, which is very bad - but effectively not a lot of harm is actually achieved," she said. "But how can you compare that with a case where you may not have an intent but you have recklessness [in which] civilian casualties are foreseeable?”1 I suggest she makes an incorrect assumption regarding her argument. She assumes that Israel killed recklessly civilians and these deaths were foreseen. Huh? She offers no data to substantiate this inflammatory statement. She only uses rhetoric provided her by Hizzbollah operatives. I have already indicated the IDF’s code of operational behavior, something she fails to even present or discuss. She also conveniently ignores the blending of Hizzbollah terrorists within the civilian population so when the IDF did strike targets these individuals were the ones hit.
Do you believe that Ms. Arbour sat in the war room with Israeli planners and leaders? Of course she did not have this access; she did not have any idea what was in the minds of IDF soldiers. The only information she could have possibly had was the Israeli and Hizzbollah operational directives previously mentioned. Therefore, to come to the following conclusion is disingenuous "When you kill civilians virtually each time [in a military attack], at some point you have to ask yourself, 'Wasn't that foreseeable that so many would be killed?" she said. "That is where I think you start having to engage in the possibility that it is somewhat culpable."1 There she goes again, misrepresenting reality during the war. Notice no data substantiating “killing virtually each time-how did she arrive at this? Perhaps the handlers in Lebanon failed to indicate that the “blended” Hizzbollah were counted as civilians thus enabling Ms. Arbour and the world opinion makers to also believe this nonsense.
She returns to the intention part of her argument with Israel. She states, "there is very little distinction between recklessness and intent," she said. "It is a small distinction as to whether you desire the result, or you foresee it as virtually certain and you do not care. In terms of culpability there is not a lot of difference between recklessness and intent."1
By denying the stated intentions of both Hizzbollah and the IDF, she arrives at unfounded conclusions. Without producing any evidence she rushes to the conclusion that Israel is guilty of crimes more so than is Hizzbollah-incredible, simply incredible that such a person can offer this with a serious demeanor. It is despicable behavior and unfortunately demonstrative again of the bias and apparently the contempt the United Nations has for Israel. It is this kind of prejudiced argument, reported around the world that enables her and others to remain part of the Middle East problem. Israelis, individuals living in the disputed territories deserve better from those meant to help protect them!
End Notes
1. HILARY LEILA KRIEGER and TOVAH LAZAROFF, “Louise Arbour: Israel may be more to blame than Hizbullah”, Jerusalem Post, November 24, 2006
2.Commission on Human Rights, http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu2/2/chr.htm
GS Don Morris, Ph.d.
Upon awaking the day after Thanksgiving, a day of reflection and peaceful gratitude for all we have, I was once again jolted back to reality here in Israel. As is my custom, I turned on my computer and started reading the local and international newspapers on line. The following headline reminded me, again, why I believe that the United Nations has lost its moral compass together with its ability to address the Middle East with any degree of ethical behavior. The headline read, “Israel may be more to blame than Hizbullah”, and I was informed that we, Israel, were the dastardly breakers of all that is humanely deceit and should receive the blame over a terrorist group called Hizzbollah1. The UN High Commissioner, for Human Rights, Louise Arbour, told me this and if I did not know the truth or the facts I certainly must believe the Commissioner for Human Rights2.
Allow me to suggest that a person who holds such a position must understand the responsibility associated with drawing conclusions after complete facts are known and analyzed. Furthermore, this person must consider the entire context in which specific actions were conducted.
Juxtaposed against the preceding headline was another one I remember: “IDF set for massive assault on Lebanon-eight soldiers killed, two kidnapped in Hizzbollah attack on northern border”, July 13,2006, Jerusalem Post. The facts shall set you free, unless you are associated with the United Nations. Israel was attacked by an international terrorist group-it was an unprovoked attacked-we immediately lost eight young people and to this day our kidnapped soldiers have not only never been heard of since this day, there is no public conversation of their return. Concomitant with these acts, Hizzbollah began firing dozens of missiles into Israel proper aimed precisely at non-military targets. They aimed their rockets of death at our northern civilian population. Most other countries would consider this cumulative behavior as an act of war. Israel did what any other nation would do-we decided to return fire and action-we went after our men. We did this to also protect one million of our citizens who were now directly in harm’s way.
To deny any of this is to distort, misrepresent and lie to the world community. A war had begun and it lasted for over one month. Within this framework of understanding battles ensued and with any war there was collateral damage. It is at this point that one can begin to discuss the operational and therefore intentional behavior of both sides in this war. Hizzbollah used the Lebanese population as human shields. Not only did it store munitions, rockets, missiles and terrorists within civilian neighborhoods, it continued the “blending process” by dressing as the local population. It used civilian homes as missile launch sites. It held at gunpoint Lebanese who tried to leave their own neighborhoods in order to find safe havens away from the Hizzbollah enemy of Israel. It even shot some citizens of Lebanon for trying to escape. Need I state the obvious? Not only are all of these actions intentional, they are illegal by any Western legal authority, including the Geneva Convention.
Israel has the most stringent “rules of engagement” of any Western military operating today. It is against these rules, it is illegal by Israeli law and it is against all Judaic practices and principles to intentionally target civilians. Yes, in war either by technical error, tactical mistake or by simply plain old bad luck civilians are killed. Does any one remember the number of British civilians killed on a daily basis during WWII?
So we arrive at the apex of this piece. Hizzbollah, international identified terrorist group, attacks without provocation the only democracy in the Middle East. Its operational standards and rules of engagement are to murder or maim as many civilians as possible, use human shields and blend in with the local population. It is no wonder that the media erroneously reported, day after day, that “innocent Lebanese civilians” were killed-you see, they counted Hizzbollah terrorists as civilians.
I am not the only one who understands and knows all of this. It is therefore shameful for a UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Louise Arbour to arrive at the conclusion that Israel is more to blame than Hizzbollah in the summer war. Try to follow her logic-this from an educated and highly decorated civilian now serving the United Nations.
She begins by responding to this question: “if there was a distinction under human rights law between missile attacks aimed at killing civilians and military strikes in which civilians are unintentionally killed, Arbour said the two could not be equated. Note she acknowledges that they cannot be equated.
Her explanation defies logic: "In one case you could have, for instance, a very objectionable intent - the intent to harm civilians, which is very bad - but effectively not a lot of harm is actually achieved," she said. "But how can you compare that with a case where you may not have an intent but you have recklessness [in which] civilian casualties are foreseeable?”1 I suggest she makes an incorrect assumption regarding her argument. She assumes that Israel killed recklessly civilians and these deaths were foreseen. Huh? She offers no data to substantiate this inflammatory statement. She only uses rhetoric provided her by Hizzbollah operatives. I have already indicated the IDF’s code of operational behavior, something she fails to even present or discuss. She also conveniently ignores the blending of Hizzbollah terrorists within the civilian population so when the IDF did strike targets these individuals were the ones hit.
Do you believe that Ms. Arbour sat in the war room with Israeli planners and leaders? Of course she did not have this access; she did not have any idea what was in the minds of IDF soldiers. The only information she could have possibly had was the Israeli and Hizzbollah operational directives previously mentioned. Therefore, to come to the following conclusion is disingenuous "When you kill civilians virtually each time [in a military attack], at some point you have to ask yourself, 'Wasn't that foreseeable that so many would be killed?" she said. "That is where I think you start having to engage in the possibility that it is somewhat culpable."1 There she goes again, misrepresenting reality during the war. Notice no data substantiating “killing virtually each time-how did she arrive at this? Perhaps the handlers in Lebanon failed to indicate that the “blended” Hizzbollah were counted as civilians thus enabling Ms. Arbour and the world opinion makers to also believe this nonsense.
She returns to the intention part of her argument with Israel. She states, "there is very little distinction between recklessness and intent," she said. "It is a small distinction as to whether you desire the result, or you foresee it as virtually certain and you do not care. In terms of culpability there is not a lot of difference between recklessness and intent."1
By denying the stated intentions of both Hizzbollah and the IDF, she arrives at unfounded conclusions. Without producing any evidence she rushes to the conclusion that Israel is guilty of crimes more so than is Hizzbollah-incredible, simply incredible that such a person can offer this with a serious demeanor. It is despicable behavior and unfortunately demonstrative again of the bias and apparently the contempt the United Nations has for Israel. It is this kind of prejudiced argument, reported around the world that enables her and others to remain part of the Middle East problem. Israelis, individuals living in the disputed territories deserve better from those meant to help protect them!
End Notes
1. HILARY LEILA KRIEGER and TOVAH LAZAROFF, “Louise Arbour: Israel may be more to blame than Hizbullah”, Jerusalem Post, November 24, 2006
2.Commission on Human Rights, http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu2/2/chr.htm
Sabtu, 18 November 2006
ABBAS: THE DISTORTION THAT IS KILLING US
By GS Don Morris, Ph.D.
Once again the latest distortion has made the rounds of most pro-Israeli writers:
The new article blaming Jews for "fanning the flames of evil and provoking wars" has appeared in the Palestinian Authority's official newspaper, Al Hayat Al Jadida , the paper owned by the Palestinian Authority and controlled by Fatah,--under Abbas’ direct control.
It is incongruous that words such as those quoted in Al Hayat Al Jadida can be viewed as representing the 'moderate' Mahmoud Abbas. Yet, time and again, from the Arab world across the Pond to America, this is the adjective used to describe the man upon whom the West rests its policy, hopes, and strategies – while the lives of innocent human beings hang in the balance. Is it not within reason to question the veracity of this assessment? How much do we really know about Mahmoud Abbas vs. what have we have been told about him by individuals whose political agenda requires the creation of a 'moderate' Abbas? Is it really in our best interest to believe that Mr. Abbas is ‘moderate’?
In truth we have been led down a pathway of misrepresentation and deceit. The first step down this path is to be convinced that only a “moderate Palestinian” leader can become a peace partner. Who and why does anyone believe and accept this as though it were the “Holy Grail”? If this is true, how does one explain the German and Japanese leaders who signed peace agreements with us at the conclusion of WWII or must we believe that they, too, were moderates? It is time to get beyond this kind of thinking.
Let us first examine his background in order to have accurate perspective of the man called Mr.'Moderate' Arab. The following are some brief facts:
· Mahmoud Abbas was born in what is now Israel; he left in 1948 to settle in Syria
· Taught school for a while, graduated from the University of Damascus and moved to Egypt where he studied law
· As a young man in his twenties Abbas worked in Qatar. Now known also as Abu Mazen, he joined Yasser Arafat and the small group of men who founded the terrorist group, Fatah, in 1959, with the stated aim of destroying Israel. As Arafat moved about over the years, Abbas went with him – to Jordan, Lebanon, and to Tunis.2
· Abbas remained at Arafat's side thereafter as a trusted key aide in Jordan, Lebanon, Tunis and, of course, the Palestinian Authority.
· He has held the most senior posts under Arafat including Secretary of the PLO Executive Committee, member of Fatah's Central Committee, head of the PLO Department of International Relations, and, in March, 2003, Abbas was Arafat's choice as the first "Prime Minister" of the Palestinian Authority.
· The 'moderate' Mahmoud Abbas took a doctorate from Oriental College in Moscow. His thesis was published as a book entitled The Other Face: The Secret Connection Between the Nazis and The Zionist Movement. It contained statements such as: "Regarding the gas chambers, which were supposedly designed for murdering living Jews: A scientific study ... denies that the gas chambers were for murdering people, and claims that they were only for incinerating bodies, out of concern for the spread of disease and infection in the region."3
· Mahmoud Abbas , alias Abu Mazen, is a Holocaust denier, to this day!
Context is everything! For nearly 4 decades, Abbas stood beside Arafat. Arafat, dressed in his ill fitting, worn out “military outfit”, scruffy beard, disheveled, and slobbering when he spoke –usually in an abrasive manner. This was the visual treat we saw day after day. His appearance, coupled with his actions, policies, and deceitful language , was observed for all of these same years. How many times did we catch Arafat in a lie, an intentional distortion? He would give a message to the West in English and then minutes later turn to the Arab media and say just the opposite.
Perhaps one of the most egregious moments was September 13, 1993, on the White House lawn. There stood Arafat, after shaking Rabin’s hand and declaring he would now strive for peaceful coexistence. Within 24 hours he was on Jordanian TV saying just the opposite. I remember when he concluded his talk with these words, “When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us”.
The West cried nary a tear with Arafat’s death. The concern was now who would step in and fill the void? Waiting in the wings was Mahmoud Abbas. We needed a new leader, one whose behavior and appearance was the anti-thesis of Arafat. Remember the international community’s concern, Hamas terror group, was positioned to take over unless…………Iraq was “starting to go south “and President Bush’s Mid-East policy was in trouble. A new leader was needed - someone acceptable to the West; Mahmoud Abbas was chosen. He dressed the part-always in a suit and properly coiffed, appropriately, calm, polished social behavior, and moderate in demeanor. He was the “new Palestinian leader” who would finally take them “home”.
Worn down by Arafat, we wanted to believe; we wanted to embrace this man. But at the end of the day he was Arafat’s buddy – someone who shared goals and values with him. To this day Abbas has no more intention of relinquishing that terror card than Arafat did.2 Here in Israel he is known as 'Arafat in a suit'.
Words are certainly important. The mark of a human being is the action associated with the spoken words. Congruency between speaking and actions equals integrity. Let us see if Mr. 'Moderate' is such a man. I will present words defining him as a “moderate” and then follow them with his own behavior.
Our Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, has emphasized US support of the Palestinian people by increasing the American foreign aid to the Palestinians to $468 million and by putting in place an international mechanism which will allow transfer of financial assistance to the Palestinians without going through the Hamas government.
The Secretary of State also stressed the importance of backing 'moderate' leaders
in the Arab world – such as Mahmoud Abbas in Palestine.
Abbas behavior: Let's look at President Abbas' "commitment." In 2005, Abbas refused to disarm the armed wing of his own Fatah party, the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades (photos), much less Hamas. Today both terrorist groups are fighting for dominance of the Palestinian Arabs. Worse still, not only is the U.S. sending aid to the Palestinians (which indirectly supports Hamas by freeing up their resources for waging terror), but we are also directly arming the ' moderate' Abbas.2
President Bush: In a White House meeting last Friday (July, 2005) and in a meeting with Jewish leaders the day before, Abbas presented himself as a 'moderate' and a “supporter of a peaceful”, two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
"I’m gaining confidence in the Palestinian prime minister and the great Cabinet," Bush said, describing them as "people who do what they say."
After this date and in early 2006, the Administration officially sanctioned a policy put together by US Army Lt.-Gen. Keith Dayton to expand by up to 70 percent Abbas' presidential guard and personal army, Force 17. The administration wishes to raise some $20 million to fund the training, arming, and expansion of Abbas' army from 3,500 to 6,000 soldiers. This move comes after the US transferred 3,000 rifles and 1 million bullets to Force 17 in June (2006).
Abbas behavior: He knows Force 17 is a terrorist army led by terrorists. Furthermore, the militant, Abu Yousuf, hinted that any new weapons provided by the U.S. to his group could be shared with the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror organization, the declared "military wing" of Abbas' Fatah party. Abu Yousuf, like several Force 17 members, is also a member of the Brigades.
Read on, Abbas did not stop here
There is a chance that Israel will attack the Palestinian territories, and in this case, these weapons and others provided [by the U.S. to Force 17] will be directed towards the (Israeli) 'occupation', Abu Yousuf said. Abbas, the 'moderate', cleverly raised funds, munitions, and weapons - courtesy of the USA. Right after he received the weapons shipment, Abbas appointed Mahmoud Damra commander of the force. Damra, who like many of the Force 17 officers and soldiers, is a Fatah terrorist wanted by Israel due to his direct involvement in the terrorist murder of at least 15 Israelis.
PM Olmert: Once Shalit is freed, Olmert will invite Abbas, a 'moderate' from the Fatah Party, to talks based on the internationally backed "road map" peace plan, Peres told Army Radio.
Abbas behavior: He asked and received Israel's permission to let an unspecified number of troops from the Jordan-based Badr Brigade enter PA areas-to buoy up Fatah against Hamas-extreme political pressure was exerted by the USA to mandate that Israel permit the return into the disputed territories of a terrorist group it had expelled for its viciousness many years ago.
The list of contradictions is endless. Yet, the US continues to uphold Abbas as a 'man of peace', a ' moderate' and a 'respectable' leader that the Bush administration wishes to strengthen. To this end, the Bush administration has 'whitewashed' Abbas' clear support for terrorism. It has excused his constant appeals to merge his Fatah terror group with Hamas and Islamic Jihad. It has ignored the fact that his Fatah terror group has committed more acts of terror than Hamas and that Fatah's involvement in terror and the sophistication of its attacks has only increased since Abbas replaced Arafat after the latter's death in November 2004.4
The Bush Administration knows Abbas is as much a moderate as Nancy Pelosi is now a centrist. Unfortunately, most Americans are unaware of the fact that daily operational policies enacted by Abbas are literally killing Israelis. The collective Western governments rush to define this chameleon in a manner meant
to calm and appease their respective populations has led to open smuggling from Egypt into Gaza. Actually, it can really no longer be called smuggling; it is open commerce. America’s “friends” the Russians are able to supply Israel’s enemy with the latest Russian made antitank missile Metis-M9. Guess whose hands they ‘fell into'? The plan is to use them not on Israel’s tanks; instead of firing rockets, Hamas intends to open a barrage of around-the-clock heavy fire on Israel, using antitank missiles, short-range ground-to-ground missiles and artillery fire – similar to what Hizballah used during the Lebanon war – and mortar fire. So, Abbas also is arming Hamas, the organization with whom he is theoretically at odds.
If we still believe that the man Mahmoud Abbas aka Abu Mazen is a 'moderate', then we must also believe that peace in the Middle East is around the corner. Perhaps we have succumbed to the adage: if one is told a lie often enough one ultimately comes to believe it. Please, a rose by any other name, is still a rose. Abbas is not the beautiful petal, he is indeed the dangerous thorn.
End Notes
PA paper: Jews fan flames of evil, http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3321651,00.html
Kushner, Arlene, “Abu Mazen: Beneath the Moderate Veneer,” FrontPageMagazine.com February 25, 2005
Roger A. Gerber, “THE CHIMERICAL MODERATION OF MAHMOUD ABBAS”, April 02, 2005, http://mideastoutpost.com/archives/000151.html
Glick,Caroline http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=24887
Special Thanks to my editor Hannah Givon
http://docstalk.blogspot.com/
By GS Don Morris, Ph.D.
Once again the latest distortion has made the rounds of most pro-Israeli writers:
The new article blaming Jews for "fanning the flames of evil and provoking wars" has appeared in the Palestinian Authority's official newspaper, Al Hayat Al Jadida , the paper owned by the Palestinian Authority and controlled by Fatah,--under Abbas’ direct control.
It is incongruous that words such as those quoted in Al Hayat Al Jadida can be viewed as representing the 'moderate' Mahmoud Abbas. Yet, time and again, from the Arab world across the Pond to America, this is the adjective used to describe the man upon whom the West rests its policy, hopes, and strategies – while the lives of innocent human beings hang in the balance. Is it not within reason to question the veracity of this assessment? How much do we really know about Mahmoud Abbas vs. what have we have been told about him by individuals whose political agenda requires the creation of a 'moderate' Abbas? Is it really in our best interest to believe that Mr. Abbas is ‘moderate’?
In truth we have been led down a pathway of misrepresentation and deceit. The first step down this path is to be convinced that only a “moderate Palestinian” leader can become a peace partner. Who and why does anyone believe and accept this as though it were the “Holy Grail”? If this is true, how does one explain the German and Japanese leaders who signed peace agreements with us at the conclusion of WWII or must we believe that they, too, were moderates? It is time to get beyond this kind of thinking.
Let us first examine his background in order to have accurate perspective of the man called Mr.'Moderate' Arab. The following are some brief facts:
· Mahmoud Abbas was born in what is now Israel; he left in 1948 to settle in Syria
· Taught school for a while, graduated from the University of Damascus and moved to Egypt where he studied law
· As a young man in his twenties Abbas worked in Qatar. Now known also as Abu Mazen, he joined Yasser Arafat and the small group of men who founded the terrorist group, Fatah, in 1959, with the stated aim of destroying Israel. As Arafat moved about over the years, Abbas went with him – to Jordan, Lebanon, and to Tunis.2
· Abbas remained at Arafat's side thereafter as a trusted key aide in Jordan, Lebanon, Tunis and, of course, the Palestinian Authority.
· He has held the most senior posts under Arafat including Secretary of the PLO Executive Committee, member of Fatah's Central Committee, head of the PLO Department of International Relations, and, in March, 2003, Abbas was Arafat's choice as the first "Prime Minister" of the Palestinian Authority.
· The 'moderate' Mahmoud Abbas took a doctorate from Oriental College in Moscow. His thesis was published as a book entitled The Other Face: The Secret Connection Between the Nazis and The Zionist Movement. It contained statements such as: "Regarding the gas chambers, which were supposedly designed for murdering living Jews: A scientific study ... denies that the gas chambers were for murdering people, and claims that they were only for incinerating bodies, out of concern for the spread of disease and infection in the region."3
· Mahmoud Abbas , alias Abu Mazen, is a Holocaust denier, to this day!
Context is everything! For nearly 4 decades, Abbas stood beside Arafat. Arafat, dressed in his ill fitting, worn out “military outfit”, scruffy beard, disheveled, and slobbering when he spoke –usually in an abrasive manner. This was the visual treat we saw day after day. His appearance, coupled with his actions, policies, and deceitful language , was observed for all of these same years. How many times did we catch Arafat in a lie, an intentional distortion? He would give a message to the West in English and then minutes later turn to the Arab media and say just the opposite.
Perhaps one of the most egregious moments was September 13, 1993, on the White House lawn. There stood Arafat, after shaking Rabin’s hand and declaring he would now strive for peaceful coexistence. Within 24 hours he was on Jordanian TV saying just the opposite. I remember when he concluded his talk with these words, “When the time comes, we can get the Arab nations to join us”.
The West cried nary a tear with Arafat’s death. The concern was now who would step in and fill the void? Waiting in the wings was Mahmoud Abbas. We needed a new leader, one whose behavior and appearance was the anti-thesis of Arafat. Remember the international community’s concern, Hamas terror group, was positioned to take over unless…………Iraq was “starting to go south “and President Bush’s Mid-East policy was in trouble. A new leader was needed - someone acceptable to the West; Mahmoud Abbas was chosen. He dressed the part-always in a suit and properly coiffed, appropriately, calm, polished social behavior, and moderate in demeanor. He was the “new Palestinian leader” who would finally take them “home”.
Worn down by Arafat, we wanted to believe; we wanted to embrace this man. But at the end of the day he was Arafat’s buddy – someone who shared goals and values with him. To this day Abbas has no more intention of relinquishing that terror card than Arafat did.2 Here in Israel he is known as 'Arafat in a suit'.
Words are certainly important. The mark of a human being is the action associated with the spoken words. Congruency between speaking and actions equals integrity. Let us see if Mr. 'Moderate' is such a man. I will present words defining him as a “moderate” and then follow them with his own behavior.
Our Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, has emphasized US support of the Palestinian people by increasing the American foreign aid to the Palestinians to $468 million and by putting in place an international mechanism which will allow transfer of financial assistance to the Palestinians without going through the Hamas government.
The Secretary of State also stressed the importance of backing 'moderate' leaders
in the Arab world – such as Mahmoud Abbas in Palestine.
Abbas behavior: Let's look at President Abbas' "commitment." In 2005, Abbas refused to disarm the armed wing of his own Fatah party, the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades (photos), much less Hamas. Today both terrorist groups are fighting for dominance of the Palestinian Arabs. Worse still, not only is the U.S. sending aid to the Palestinians (which indirectly supports Hamas by freeing up their resources for waging terror), but we are also directly arming the ' moderate' Abbas.2
President Bush: In a White House meeting last Friday (July, 2005) and in a meeting with Jewish leaders the day before, Abbas presented himself as a 'moderate' and a “supporter of a peaceful”, two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
"I’m gaining confidence in the Palestinian prime minister and the great Cabinet," Bush said, describing them as "people who do what they say."
After this date and in early 2006, the Administration officially sanctioned a policy put together by US Army Lt.-Gen. Keith Dayton to expand by up to 70 percent Abbas' presidential guard and personal army, Force 17. The administration wishes to raise some $20 million to fund the training, arming, and expansion of Abbas' army from 3,500 to 6,000 soldiers. This move comes after the US transferred 3,000 rifles and 1 million bullets to Force 17 in June (2006).
Abbas behavior: He knows Force 17 is a terrorist army led by terrorists. Furthermore, the militant, Abu Yousuf, hinted that any new weapons provided by the U.S. to his group could be shared with the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror organization, the declared "military wing" of Abbas' Fatah party. Abu Yousuf, like several Force 17 members, is also a member of the Brigades.
Read on, Abbas did not stop here
There is a chance that Israel will attack the Palestinian territories, and in this case, these weapons and others provided [by the U.S. to Force 17] will be directed towards the (Israeli) 'occupation', Abu Yousuf said. Abbas, the 'moderate', cleverly raised funds, munitions, and weapons - courtesy of the USA. Right after he received the weapons shipment, Abbas appointed Mahmoud Damra commander of the force. Damra, who like many of the Force 17 officers and soldiers, is a Fatah terrorist wanted by Israel due to his direct involvement in the terrorist murder of at least 15 Israelis.
PM Olmert: Once Shalit is freed, Olmert will invite Abbas, a 'moderate' from the Fatah Party, to talks based on the internationally backed "road map" peace plan, Peres told Army Radio.
Abbas behavior: He asked and received Israel's permission to let an unspecified number of troops from the Jordan-based Badr Brigade enter PA areas-to buoy up Fatah against Hamas-extreme political pressure was exerted by the USA to mandate that Israel permit the return into the disputed territories of a terrorist group it had expelled for its viciousness many years ago.
The list of contradictions is endless. Yet, the US continues to uphold Abbas as a 'man of peace', a ' moderate' and a 'respectable' leader that the Bush administration wishes to strengthen. To this end, the Bush administration has 'whitewashed' Abbas' clear support for terrorism. It has excused his constant appeals to merge his Fatah terror group with Hamas and Islamic Jihad. It has ignored the fact that his Fatah terror group has committed more acts of terror than Hamas and that Fatah's involvement in terror and the sophistication of its attacks has only increased since Abbas replaced Arafat after the latter's death in November 2004.4
The Bush Administration knows Abbas is as much a moderate as Nancy Pelosi is now a centrist. Unfortunately, most Americans are unaware of the fact that daily operational policies enacted by Abbas are literally killing Israelis. The collective Western governments rush to define this chameleon in a manner meant
to calm and appease their respective populations has led to open smuggling from Egypt into Gaza. Actually, it can really no longer be called smuggling; it is open commerce. America’s “friends” the Russians are able to supply Israel’s enemy with the latest Russian made antitank missile Metis-M9. Guess whose hands they ‘fell into'? The plan is to use them not on Israel’s tanks; instead of firing rockets, Hamas intends to open a barrage of around-the-clock heavy fire on Israel, using antitank missiles, short-range ground-to-ground missiles and artillery fire – similar to what Hizballah used during the Lebanon war – and mortar fire. So, Abbas also is arming Hamas, the organization with whom he is theoretically at odds.
If we still believe that the man Mahmoud Abbas aka Abu Mazen is a 'moderate', then we must also believe that peace in the Middle East is around the corner. Perhaps we have succumbed to the adage: if one is told a lie often enough one ultimately comes to believe it. Please, a rose by any other name, is still a rose. Abbas is not the beautiful petal, he is indeed the dangerous thorn.
End Notes
PA paper: Jews fan flames of evil, http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-3321651,00.html
Kushner, Arlene, “Abu Mazen: Beneath the Moderate Veneer,” FrontPageMagazine.com February 25, 2005
Roger A. Gerber, “THE CHIMERICAL MODERATION OF MAHMOUD ABBAS”, April 02, 2005, http://mideastoutpost.com/archives/000151.html
Glick,Caroline http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Printable.asp?ID=24887
Special Thanks to my editor Hannah Givon
http://docstalk.blogspot.com/
Minggu, 29 Oktober 2006
An Enviable Decency
GS Don Morris, Ph.D.
Oct. 27, 2006
http://www.americanthinker.com
It seems as though we may have forgotten the good will of the common person. We see on television how people treat one another in a less than gracious manner, we read about the trials and tribulations of entire cultures. If one did not know better, you would think the world is aflame. Today, allow me to share one small example of just the opposite behavior.
We left the northern city of Esztergom, Hungary and crossed the Danube River into the country of Slovakia. The border crossing is alway an experience for our group given that two of the passports are from out of the area-we timed how long it would take for the official to process our papers. The average time has been around 25 minutes-today we made it through in 5 minutes. As we drove into the countryside, we seemed to be transferred back in time.
The next 20 minutes were spent driving through the beautiful Slovakia countryside on a narrow 2-lane road similar to those found in the States back in the early 1950s. As we passed through a couple of villages I was reminded of a time long past in rural America-this part of Slovakia remains locked in a time period from long ago. Our final destination was a small village of about 3000 people-the primary business is farming; it is here that the story really begins.
Twice a year we visit our extended family in this small rural area of a recently formed country-Slovakia. By American and most Western standards this is an incredibly poor community, few people have cars, many still ride bicycles, most walk from one point to another and our friends still barter for goods and services. For example, money is scarce but the family cows produce milk-up to 40 quarts a day are created; the neighbors arrive, one by one to pick up their daily milk. For about 25 cents a quart you walk home with fresh milk right from the cow.
Next door there is no indoor plumbing, maybe three people have a computer and as far as I know the Internet has not reached this part of the country as of yet. There are no stores selling designer clothes. A shirt, a pair of pants and shoes are worn by at least three in a family before new ones are purchased. The youngster walking about the area with a DKNY garment received it from a relative living abroad, he or she wears it proudly. Macintosh is the apple growing on the local trees and a television is special if you can afford one in your home. This is not an exception in rural Slovakia, this is the norm. On the Slovakian-Hungarian border it is a different story. I have observed on the border during the past 9 years a major transformation taking place. At first there were only a handful of stores or businesses; today we passed by the Hollywood Pizzeria. Free enterprise is abundant and services and products are found everywhere. Many Hungarians now cross over the bridge to purchase such goods because they are even cheaper in Slovakia than in Hungary. For an American, Hungarian prices are gold mines and the Slovakian prices are even lower.
We usually bring to our family some of the following:selected fruits, beer, chocolates and a few small gifts for the children. We spend our time together laughing, singing songs, playing outdoors and sitting around a huge table and talking about family, life in general and yes, even politics. Recently we have started swapping tales from our past and I notice that the young children, who never knew what is was like to live under a totalitarian government remain at the table and listen intently.
When we are ready to return the 20 miles to Esztergom gifts are bestowed upon us-this from a group who, by our standards, are poor. We arrive back in Hungary with a gallon of fresh milk, two pounds of new cheese, 3 pounds of grapes from their small vineyard, a dozen eggs and a small box of chocolates. We walk out to the car, it takes at least 20 more minutes to say goodbye-everyone from age 82 to 8 months stands by the car throwing kisses and waving goodbye-it is something special. It happens every time we visit-it is a way of life, part of their culture.
The same is true with our Hungarian family and friends. They seem to be a few years ahead of Slovakia in terms of economy yet, their life styles and events are very similar. This past week at the dinner table our Hungarian extended family started telling us what it was like back in the 1980s prior to their separation from the totalitarian government that ruled over them for over 3 decades.For example, back in those days they could only afford one new pair of pants from each monthly salary-that is all the extras they could buy. Today, the situation is different-I have noticed how the 10-15 year olds listen intently, not believing their ears. Yes, in such a short time, the Hungarian people have completely turned their lives around; they have done this so quickly that the newest generation has never known such proverty and wonder how their parents ever lived without DVDs,cell phones, iPods and the Internet.
These stories are not unique to Hungary and Slovakia; they do represent a social change witnessed by all of us during a most dramatic period of world history. It is useful to know the following about these two countries:
· During the 20th century their borders were substantially altered
· Hungary lost many thousands of acres-its current borders determined in 1990, Slovakia was part of Czechoslovakia until 1993 and now is a country unto itself
· Tens of thousands of Hungarians and Slovakians lost or had taken from them all of their belongings, homes, jobs- their way of life as their new states were being formed
· There was no immediate or long term monies - no Marshall Plan for them, made available to either country for development of their economies nor was there a special UN division formed to take care of their collective populations-there was no 279 million Euros provided either country as was given to the PA in 20051
· As they returned to a life of freedom, acceptance and tolerance, their lives began to change, shift and expand in a relatively rapid time frame
· They each created their own form of democracy, they are working on such challenges as is presented any people when they transfer from a totalitarian to a free form of government-they tell me it is a process and they are learning every year.
· The people tell me that they realize they are not America or Great Britain, they have a unique culture that is developing its own form of democracy-they tell me it is working well in spite of all the growing pains and they much prefer it to Communism
· In spite of losing homelands, belongings, possessions, family members, torture by an occupying nation neither country has sent homicide bombers, or missiles or blown up busses in their neighboring countries-countries far more affluent than theirs. Their texbooks do not misrepresent the regional history or indigenous peoples.
· They do not preach hatred to the general population nor does their television portray their neighbors as evil-even though they seem to have so much more in terms of material goods and services
· Both countries have invested in their people, in ideas and concepts that add positively to the lives of people everywhere-Hungary is becoming an international leader in technology
· Finally, tolerance of those different from themselves is being practiced within both countires.
For many of us living in the USA we have only known and experienced our 50 states. Let us be honest, we have also only experienced a fairly high standard of living- Today’s young generation does not know a life without televison, dvds, cell phones and fast food. I make no judgment about these facts, rather, I suggest what we know as a personal truth is the result of our current life experiences. What seems to be missing is that we believe that the rest of the world has had some if not many of these same experiences-we have not been told the truth in a manner that would help us understand what is going on today away from the USA borders. Our borders have been defined for decades, this is not the case across the world. Since WW II or the early 1950s countries have come and gone. I do not write this in a cavalier manner, it is a matter of public record. For example, in Europe the following changes occurred:
· Germany and Japan re-divided the areas under their control. Following world war II, the borders of Germany were moved west to the Oder-Neisse line, while the approximate boundary of the Curzon Line was used as the eastern border of
· 1947 Free Territory of Trieste set up (bordering Italy and Yugoslavia)
· 1949 Saar incorporated into the Federal Republic of Germany (Previously bordered Luxembourg, France and Germany)
1990 October 3 - East Germany reunites with West Germany.
1991 With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the USSR split up into 15 independent states. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia and Slovenia declare independence from the Yugoslavia which now comprises Serbia and Montenegro. (This was renamed "Serbia & Montenegro" in 2003)
1993. Czechoslovakia splits into Czech Republic and Slovakia
2006 Montenegro gains independence from Serbia & Montenegro. Thus Serbia also becomes an independent state.2
In Africa and Asia the changes have been enormous. Over 25 border changes have taken place in Africa alone.3 Since the so-called Cold War, changes in borders in Europe and Central Asia have created 24 new countries. During this time it is the USA that has remained stable even though we did add two additional states Hawaii and Alaska. Imagine the social, cultural and economic impact these changes had upon citizens living today within the new borders.
Change is part of life in this world, it occurs even if we wish it differently. Life events, people, situations and circumstances interact with one another with the result being our daily reality. It seems to me that how a person or a group of people choose to interpret the changes, how they choose to act in accordance with these same changes and what they choose to focus upon is what distinguishes one country from one and the others. Furthermore, it is this same focus that seems to define the character, integrity and honor of a group of people.
Slovakians and Hungarians have emerged from the totalitarian control of the former communist Soviet Union to develop into an emerging democracy. They are focused upon freedom of choice in every aspect of their lives. They have invested heavily in education, their economy and their future development as a nation state with comparatively little assistance from the external community (finally in 2002 Hungary was provided loans and some monies from the EU). Regardless of the current economic levels, regardless of the historic grievances they each sustained and regardless of loosing material items they have selected the path of human decency. They are in the process of defining their national identity and character. They have developed their personal integrity and are standing tall among the emerging worlds nations. As a nation they have displayed and continue to display decent human behavior among their respective citizenships as well as with the world community. This, I submit, is a matter of choice, exercised in accordance with their cultural values. It seems that the media, the world leaders and general international population do not acknowledge their incredible accomplishments ongoing since 1990-a mere 16 years. Why no attention? Why have they not been held up as models for others to emulate?
I contrast these two groups with another group of people, in the Middle East, who have obviously chosen another path-the results should not be a surprise to anyone in the West. They have had the greatest per capital economic aide provided any world population since the 1980s, they had during the same time frame as the Hungarians and Slovakians, unencumbered aide and support by the world community and their actions, behavior and results pale in comparison.
Yet, the world, through its actions, regretably reinforces actions and behaviors that are contrary to self reliance, economic development and acceptance and tolerance of other people. I submit for consideration this is the result of their own victimhood and we witness these horrific results daily.
We, in Israel, are not surprised-I, for one, am simply disappointed and am now approaching anger, that the world responds hypocrically to this one group-the world communities do not hold them to the same behavioral standards we hold the Slovakians and Hungarians to, I wonder why?
Meanwhile. I shall continue to admire the courageous daily actions of those who choose to join the international world of decency-my extended family is really representative of good people and my admiration abounds.
End Notes
European Union Support for Extremist and Politicized NGOs http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile/eu_funding_231006.html, Oct. 24, 2006
The Cold War International History Project (CWIHP,Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War, Oct. 25, 2006
Mokhtar, G. (1990) UNESCO General History of Africa, Vol. II, Abridged Edition: Ancient Africa, University of California Press. ISBN 0-85255-092-8.
Special thank you to my editor Chana Givon; Don’s Blog: http://docstalk.blogspot.com
GS Don Morris, Ph.D.
Oct. 27, 2006
http://www.americanthinker.com
It seems as though we may have forgotten the good will of the common person. We see on television how people treat one another in a less than gracious manner, we read about the trials and tribulations of entire cultures. If one did not know better, you would think the world is aflame. Today, allow me to share one small example of just the opposite behavior.
We left the northern city of Esztergom, Hungary and crossed the Danube River into the country of Slovakia. The border crossing is alway an experience for our group given that two of the passports are from out of the area-we timed how long it would take for the official to process our papers. The average time has been around 25 minutes-today we made it through in 5 minutes. As we drove into the countryside, we seemed to be transferred back in time.
The next 20 minutes were spent driving through the beautiful Slovakia countryside on a narrow 2-lane road similar to those found in the States back in the early 1950s. As we passed through a couple of villages I was reminded of a time long past in rural America-this part of Slovakia remains locked in a time period from long ago. Our final destination was a small village of about 3000 people-the primary business is farming; it is here that the story really begins.
Twice a year we visit our extended family in this small rural area of a recently formed country-Slovakia. By American and most Western standards this is an incredibly poor community, few people have cars, many still ride bicycles, most walk from one point to another and our friends still barter for goods and services. For example, money is scarce but the family cows produce milk-up to 40 quarts a day are created; the neighbors arrive, one by one to pick up their daily milk. For about 25 cents a quart you walk home with fresh milk right from the cow.
Next door there is no indoor plumbing, maybe three people have a computer and as far as I know the Internet has not reached this part of the country as of yet. There are no stores selling designer clothes. A shirt, a pair of pants and shoes are worn by at least three in a family before new ones are purchased. The youngster walking about the area with a DKNY garment received it from a relative living abroad, he or she wears it proudly. Macintosh is the apple growing on the local trees and a television is special if you can afford one in your home. This is not an exception in rural Slovakia, this is the norm. On the Slovakian-Hungarian border it is a different story. I have observed on the border during the past 9 years a major transformation taking place. At first there were only a handful of stores or businesses; today we passed by the Hollywood Pizzeria. Free enterprise is abundant and services and products are found everywhere. Many Hungarians now cross over the bridge to purchase such goods because they are even cheaper in Slovakia than in Hungary. For an American, Hungarian prices are gold mines and the Slovakian prices are even lower.
We usually bring to our family some of the following:selected fruits, beer, chocolates and a few small gifts for the children. We spend our time together laughing, singing songs, playing outdoors and sitting around a huge table and talking about family, life in general and yes, even politics. Recently we have started swapping tales from our past and I notice that the young children, who never knew what is was like to live under a totalitarian government remain at the table and listen intently.
When we are ready to return the 20 miles to Esztergom gifts are bestowed upon us-this from a group who, by our standards, are poor. We arrive back in Hungary with a gallon of fresh milk, two pounds of new cheese, 3 pounds of grapes from their small vineyard, a dozen eggs and a small box of chocolates. We walk out to the car, it takes at least 20 more minutes to say goodbye-everyone from age 82 to 8 months stands by the car throwing kisses and waving goodbye-it is something special. It happens every time we visit-it is a way of life, part of their culture.
The same is true with our Hungarian family and friends. They seem to be a few years ahead of Slovakia in terms of economy yet, their life styles and events are very similar. This past week at the dinner table our Hungarian extended family started telling us what it was like back in the 1980s prior to their separation from the totalitarian government that ruled over them for over 3 decades.For example, back in those days they could only afford one new pair of pants from each monthly salary-that is all the extras they could buy. Today, the situation is different-I have noticed how the 10-15 year olds listen intently, not believing their ears. Yes, in such a short time, the Hungarian people have completely turned their lives around; they have done this so quickly that the newest generation has never known such proverty and wonder how their parents ever lived without DVDs,cell phones, iPods and the Internet.
These stories are not unique to Hungary and Slovakia; they do represent a social change witnessed by all of us during a most dramatic period of world history. It is useful to know the following about these two countries:
· During the 20th century their borders were substantially altered
· Hungary lost many thousands of acres-its current borders determined in 1990, Slovakia was part of Czechoslovakia until 1993 and now is a country unto itself
· Tens of thousands of Hungarians and Slovakians lost or had taken from them all of their belongings, homes, jobs- their way of life as their new states were being formed
· There was no immediate or long term monies - no Marshall Plan for them, made available to either country for development of their economies nor was there a special UN division formed to take care of their collective populations-there was no 279 million Euros provided either country as was given to the PA in 20051
· As they returned to a life of freedom, acceptance and tolerance, their lives began to change, shift and expand in a relatively rapid time frame
· They each created their own form of democracy, they are working on such challenges as is presented any people when they transfer from a totalitarian to a free form of government-they tell me it is a process and they are learning every year.
· The people tell me that they realize they are not America or Great Britain, they have a unique culture that is developing its own form of democracy-they tell me it is working well in spite of all the growing pains and they much prefer it to Communism
· In spite of losing homelands, belongings, possessions, family members, torture by an occupying nation neither country has sent homicide bombers, or missiles or blown up busses in their neighboring countries-countries far more affluent than theirs. Their texbooks do not misrepresent the regional history or indigenous peoples.
· They do not preach hatred to the general population nor does their television portray their neighbors as evil-even though they seem to have so much more in terms of material goods and services
· Both countries have invested in their people, in ideas and concepts that add positively to the lives of people everywhere-Hungary is becoming an international leader in technology
· Finally, tolerance of those different from themselves is being practiced within both countires.
For many of us living in the USA we have only known and experienced our 50 states. Let us be honest, we have also only experienced a fairly high standard of living- Today’s young generation does not know a life without televison, dvds, cell phones and fast food. I make no judgment about these facts, rather, I suggest what we know as a personal truth is the result of our current life experiences. What seems to be missing is that we believe that the rest of the world has had some if not many of these same experiences-we have not been told the truth in a manner that would help us understand what is going on today away from the USA borders. Our borders have been defined for decades, this is not the case across the world. Since WW II or the early 1950s countries have come and gone. I do not write this in a cavalier manner, it is a matter of public record. For example, in Europe the following changes occurred:
· Germany and Japan re-divided the areas under their control. Following world war II, the borders of Germany were moved west to the Oder-Neisse line, while the approximate boundary of the Curzon Line was used as the eastern border of
· 1947 Free Territory of Trieste set up (bordering Italy and Yugoslavia)
· 1949 Saar incorporated into the Federal Republic of Germany (Previously bordered Luxembourg, France and Germany)
1990 October 3 - East Germany reunites with West Germany.
1991 With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the USSR split up into 15 independent states. Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia and Slovenia declare independence from the Yugoslavia which now comprises Serbia and Montenegro. (This was renamed "Serbia & Montenegro" in 2003)
1993. Czechoslovakia splits into Czech Republic and Slovakia
2006 Montenegro gains independence from Serbia & Montenegro. Thus Serbia also becomes an independent state.2
In Africa and Asia the changes have been enormous. Over 25 border changes have taken place in Africa alone.3 Since the so-called Cold War, changes in borders in Europe and Central Asia have created 24 new countries. During this time it is the USA that has remained stable even though we did add two additional states Hawaii and Alaska. Imagine the social, cultural and economic impact these changes had upon citizens living today within the new borders.
Change is part of life in this world, it occurs even if we wish it differently. Life events, people, situations and circumstances interact with one another with the result being our daily reality. It seems to me that how a person or a group of people choose to interpret the changes, how they choose to act in accordance with these same changes and what they choose to focus upon is what distinguishes one country from one and the others. Furthermore, it is this same focus that seems to define the character, integrity and honor of a group of people.
Slovakians and Hungarians have emerged from the totalitarian control of the former communist Soviet Union to develop into an emerging democracy. They are focused upon freedom of choice in every aspect of their lives. They have invested heavily in education, their economy and their future development as a nation state with comparatively little assistance from the external community (finally in 2002 Hungary was provided loans and some monies from the EU). Regardless of the current economic levels, regardless of the historic grievances they each sustained and regardless of loosing material items they have selected the path of human decency. They are in the process of defining their national identity and character. They have developed their personal integrity and are standing tall among the emerging worlds nations. As a nation they have displayed and continue to display decent human behavior among their respective citizenships as well as with the world community. This, I submit, is a matter of choice, exercised in accordance with their cultural values. It seems that the media, the world leaders and general international population do not acknowledge their incredible accomplishments ongoing since 1990-a mere 16 years. Why no attention? Why have they not been held up as models for others to emulate?
I contrast these two groups with another group of people, in the Middle East, who have obviously chosen another path-the results should not be a surprise to anyone in the West. They have had the greatest per capital economic aide provided any world population since the 1980s, they had during the same time frame as the Hungarians and Slovakians, unencumbered aide and support by the world community and their actions, behavior and results pale in comparison.
Yet, the world, through its actions, regretably reinforces actions and behaviors that are contrary to self reliance, economic development and acceptance and tolerance of other people. I submit for consideration this is the result of their own victimhood and we witness these horrific results daily.
We, in Israel, are not surprised-I, for one, am simply disappointed and am now approaching anger, that the world responds hypocrically to this one group-the world communities do not hold them to the same behavioral standards we hold the Slovakians and Hungarians to, I wonder why?
Meanwhile. I shall continue to admire the courageous daily actions of those who choose to join the international world of decency-my extended family is really representative of good people and my admiration abounds.
End Notes
European Union Support for Extremist and Politicized NGOs http://www.ngo-monitor.org/archives/infofile/eu_funding_231006.html, Oct. 24, 2006
The Cold War International History Project (CWIHP,Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_War, Oct. 25, 2006
Mokhtar, G. (1990) UNESCO General History of Africa, Vol. II, Abridged Edition: Ancient Africa, University of California Press. ISBN 0-85255-092-8.
Special thank you to my editor Chana Givon; Don’s Blog: http://docstalk.blogspot.com
Senin, 16 Oktober 2006
The Differences Among Us-Part Two
GS Don Morris, Ph.D.
October 16, 2006
My basic premise is that there are significant differences between the Judeo-Christian culture and the Islamic culture. It is these perceived and interpreted differences that are the root cause of much of today’s terror and violence perpetrated against the West. Understanding that differences do exist, acknowledging that they exist and then being willing to take appropriate actions is the reason we must finally face this clear and present danger. Proper identification of the problem is the only way one can develop appropriate and effective answers. To continue to inaccurately identify the problem or to ignore or deny its existence can only mean we are unwilling to defend our way of life. I submit for consideration that this is our generation’s trial and, therefore, test.1
The context of this piece is to identify some of the overt behavioral differences between the Judeo-Christian and Muslim cultures. The author has no intention of indicating that the behaviors are doctrine driven; rather I do suggest that they are demonstrative of the influence each group’s culture has upon their resultant actions. For purposes of the discussion the following definition of culture has again been used:
“The totality of socially transmitted behavior patterns, arts, beliefs, institutions, and all other products of human work and thought. These patterns, traits, and products considered with respect to a particular category, such as a field, subject, or mode of expression…The predominating attitudes and behavior that characterize the functioning of a group or organization”.2
Knowledge, experiences, and interactions with people enable a person to develop his/her own personal belief system. Setting aside the role religion plays in development of one’s beliefs, the socialization and education of an individual certainly helps one form a point of view. The result of forming opinions about life, others and sense of morality is acted out as behavior that is reinforced by the participant’s social group. We are who we are in part because of whom we live with and with whom we develop. Mix in religious teachings and the essence of a human being is formed.
We, in America, understand this simple explanation of why people are different from one another. Those of us who grew up in the East find it odd, different and even difficult to live in the West-the way of life is so disparate from one another. On the other hand how many stories have we each heard about the native Californian deciding to leave his/her life, move to another state, only to return to California within 5 years. The reason so often given: “I just could not adapt to their way of thinking or acting-I needed to come home.” This is witnessed around our country daily and we even have developed a sense of humor about it. Therefore, it is quite easy to understand that our views and values, the manner in which we choose to live are significantly different from those people who live in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran, Malaysia - to identify but a few countries. Everything from how we dress, to what we eat, to how we greet people to behavioral expectations between men and women and so much more is as different as the sun and the moon. To dismiss that these differences exist is naïve and ignorant. To chastise those who point out the differences is demonstrative of one’s failure to tell the truth. It seems lately that identifying differences automatically puts one into a category of being intolerant or racist. What a pity, to tell the truth is the ethical and moral duty of a good person.
The USA is perhaps the largest example of an ongoing social experiment. We are still in the process of learning how to live cooperatively with so many different groups of people choosing to become part of our culture. We are still figuring it out. What has been missing for some time is what does it mean to be an American? A return to this discussion is crucial. I will offer only this: our country was founded on Judeo-Christian values and beliefs; we believe that English should be the primary language, we developed a Constitution grounded in the aforementioned values and we believe in a multitude of freedoms. From this foundation an entire American lifestyle has emerged-the result of commonly held beliefs –assimilation is still going on each day by people from many cultures. A code of operational behaviors is the result of the commonly held values. These translate into daily behaviors such as greetings, foods, speaking styles and clothing lines. Our life philosophy and thus our daily behavior is based upon the sum total of all the experiences we have had until today; we act in accordance with these. People are simply different.
It may be due to my own life perspicacity but I for one love the Western culture I live in and I choose it for my children and grandchildren. I do not support another culture coming into my country of origin and imposing itself upon me. I was taught from the time I could talk to always respect another’s person’s home and to not impose our family’s “way of doing things” on them. As I have traveled the world, I have adopted the same attitude. The fact is that visiting many other countries, particularly those in the Middle East and South Asia where Islam is the dominant religion, it is imperative that one not impose on others his/her “homegrown” behaviors; the consequences are severe. Yet, today, it is some practioners of Islam who want to impose their entire way of life upon us. The following represents only the tip of the iceberg:
The Minnesota chapter of the Muslim American Society, an organization the Chicago Tribune has established is devoted to turning the United States into a country run by Islamic law. The wife of a former head of the organization, for example, has explained that its goal is "to educate everyone about Islam and to follow the teachings of Islam with the hope of establishing an Islamic state."3
“The government of Saudi Arabia is distributing books and pamphlets across the United States in an effort to recruit American Muslims to an international struggle against Christians and Jews, the director of a religious freedom organization told the Senate Judiciary Committee Nov. 8.”4
Omar M. Ahmad Chairman of CAIR made the following statement a few years ago, "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran ... should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth." To be fair, I must note that CAIR announced that Omar Ahmad denied making the statement and CAIR was seeking a retraction from the newspaper that published the story on July 4, 1998. As a follow up side note Steve Waterhouse, editor of The Argus in Fremont, Calif., told WND his paper has not been contacted by CAIR. The article of denial also was run in a sister publication, the San Ramon Valley Herald. The paper's city editor, Dave Boitano, said he would have known if CAIR had sought a retraction. Interesting strategy CAIR employs.
Imam Siraj Wahaj, a CAIR board member, who is one of the most respected American Muslim leaders and is vice president of the Islamic Society of North America. Dr. Daniel Pipes reports that he "calls for replacing the U.S. government with a caliphate."
Still more efforts by Saudi Arabia to Spread (Wahhabi) Islam :
· "…The determination of the Kingdom to support Islam and Islamic institutions to the best of its ability was evident from the formation of the Kingdom by King Abdul Aziz but it was only when oil revenues began to generate real wealth that the Kingdom could fulfill its ambitions of spreading the word of Islam to every corner of the world, of assisting Muslim countries less well endowed economically and of alleviating the suffering of Muslim minorities wherever they might live."
· Efforts in the U.S."The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia under the leadership of King Fahd Ibn Abd Al-Aziz, has given support to the following institutions in the United States:
· Dar Al-Salam Institute, the Fresno Mosque in California
· Islamic Center in Colombia, Missouri
· Islamic Center in East Lansing, Michigan
· Islamic Center in Los Angeles, California
· Islamic Center in New Brunswick, New Jersey
· Islamic Center in New York
· Islamic Center in Tida, Maryland
· Islamic Center in Toledo, Ohio
· Islamic Center in Virginia
· Islamic Center in Washington
· Islamic Cultural Center in Chicago
· King Fahd Mosque in Los Angeles
· Mosque of the Albanian Community in Chicago
· South-West Big Mosque of Chicago
· Omar Ibn Al-Khattab Mosque in Los Angeles." 5
For your consideration: It is Islam and its practioners who proactively attempt and often demand to see to it that the international community operates under the veil of Islam. There is a major difference between Judaism, Christianity and Islam. “Islam was born with the idea that it should rule the world… Judaism speaks about national salvation… Christianity speaks about the idea that every single person in the world can be saved from his sins. Islam says "Allah sent Mohammed with the true religion so that it should rule over all the religions."6
The language we use is different as well as interpreted differently. There are many common day examples. Here in Israel what is reported in English to the media is reported the exact opposite in Arabic. Peace for our culture means to accept the other party, tolerate and empower the person and truly believe that conflict is over. In the Islamic world of interpretation there is but a hudna - temporary lull. Once the leaders feel they have more than enough power they immediately attack-there is no such concept as “peace”.
Even during wartime the West operates within certain rules or laws. “The civilized world believes in democracy, the rule of law, including international law, human rights, free speech and free press, among other liberties. There are naive old-fashioned habits such as respecting religious sites and symbols, not using ambulances and hospitals for acts of war, avoiding the mutilation of dead bodies and not using children as human shields or human bombs.”7
“The problem is that the civilized world is still having illusions about the rule of law in a totally lawless environment. It is trying to play ice hockey by sending a ballerina ice-skater into the ring or to knock out a heavyweight boxer by a chess player… The amazing thing is that all of these crooks demand protection under international law, and define all those who attack them as "war criminals," with some Western media repeating the allegations.”7
Judaism and Christianity are religions unto themselves. Not so with Islam. Nagdi Allam, born in Egypt, and today vice editor of the Corriere della Sera wrote that the root of evil was in the blind ideology of hatred by some Muslims, an ideology that was raping the faith…The problem is an internal Islamic problem since extremists have transformed the faith in God into an ideology which wants to impose a theocratic and totalitarian regime, he concluded.8
“Islam is not a religion as most Westerners understand it. For the Western media and apologetic thinkers, Islam is compared to Christianity, and Muslim groups in the European and American countries are defined as religious communities… But Islam is not a religion in this “narrow” sense. It is much more than that. It is a system of law, it is a social and political system; it is a way of life. It has full control over the behavior of the individual, the society, and the state. It deals with war and peace, it defines the relations between the Moslems and the rest of the world, and as we saw, it also determines the attitude to non-Muslims who are unfortunate enough to come under Islamic rule.”9
In the West we believe in freedom of speech, which includes criticizing as well as accepting criticism. This behavior comes directly from our Judeo-Christian values. This is absolutely not accepted nor true for many practicing Islam. The current examples are the Muslim world’s reactions to the Danish cartoons, to the words of a Pope quoting another writer and a teacher in France who has gone into hiding after receiving death threats. His offense? He published a column in the French newspaper Le Figaro in which he characterized the Muslim prophet Muhammad as “a merciless war chief, plunderer, slaughterer of Jews and a polygamist.”
The resultant behavior of this poor man’s honesty and accurate statement is the following:
Redeker said that one of the threats he received stated: “You will never feel secure on this earth. One billion, three hundred thousand Muslims are ready to kill you.” As the death threats poured in, everyone abandoned Redeker. The teacher himself noted that France’s education ministry “has not even contacted me, has not deigned to get in touch to see if I need any help.” The senior editor of Le Figaro, Pierre Rousselin, declared on Al-Jazeera that he had been mistaken to publish Redeker’s article, and hastened to assure the Islamic world that the article did not reflect the opinion of the paper.”10 Allow me to suggest that the Islamic rhetoric still seems to cause some people to lose any sense of ethics as well as any remaining courage they might have had.
It seems to me that the concept and application of multi-culturalism has had some unintended consequences-at least I hope they were unintended. For example, those of us who question the belief that everyone can live together peacefully are labeled anti this and “-ist” that; even in the hallowed halls of my academia I cannot have a reasonable discussion when I challenge my colleagues on this point. We have created a social consciousness that has invented “political correctness” as an operational behavior in our daily speaking lives. People are fearful of upsetting someone else or goodness gracious offending someone. This has lead to “passive acceptance” of others behavioral practices. We are not standing up to or by our internal behavioral principles. The consequences to each of us are enormous. The regretful results are dangerous to our country. Curiously political correctness does not seem to be part of other peoples’ culture and thus they are not bound by it. However, it is used against us and has highlighted our Achilles heel.
Finally, the concept of 'Pre-emptive obedience' is making a comeback in re-unified Germany and several other European countries. What is this? In Communist East Germany this meant guessing the future orders of the politburo and obeying them before they were issued. There have been many examples of this recently in Europe, although it has also presented itself in America.11 Here are but a few:
· It was based on "pre-emptive obedience" that the German Opera in Berlin decided to cancel its production of Mozart's Idomeneo after the managers decided that it might anger Muslims.
· In Spain, folkloric ceremonies and carnivals marking the expulsion of the Moors from Andalusia have been cancelled in all but a handful of villages, ending a 400-year old tradition.
· In most European countries, an official black of list of books has emerged, containing works deemed to be "hurtful to Muslim sentiments".11
This particular author cites many more examples of this behavior. The following line shouts at us: The practitioners of "pre-emptive obedience" often claim they are acting in accordance with the best principles of multiculturalism.11
It is time to awaken if one is asleep and for those who understand it is time to secure some courage and stand by the principles by which we live.
End Notes
Morris, GS Don ‘The Differences Among Us,” posted www.PRIMER.org, Oct. 10,2006
The American Heritage® Stedman's Medical Dictionary Copyright © 2002, 2001, 1995 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.
“Apple’s Mecca project provokes Muslim reaction,” http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD131506, Oct. 11,2006
William Matthews, “Saudi books aim to divide U.S. Muslims, infidels, Congress told”, http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1232073.php , Nov. 20, 2005
'Billions Spent by Saudi Royal Family to Spread Islam to Every Corner of the Earth', MEMRI, March 27, 2002.
Moshe Sharon, “Agenda of Islam”, referenced in “The Differences Among Us”.
Haim Harari, “A View from the Eye of the Storm”,
Sergio I. Minerbi, “Is it good for the West?” Jerusalem Post, September 18, 2006
Moshe Sharon, Reviving the Caliphate, October, 2006
Robert Spencer, The Philosopher and the Fatwa, Front Page, Oct. 2, 2006
Amir Taheri, 'Pre-emptive obedience' at work, http://www.gulfnews.com/, Oct.12,2006
Special thank you to my editor-Chana Givon
See more at: http://docstalk.blogspot.com
GS Don Morris, Ph.D.
October 16, 2006
My basic premise is that there are significant differences between the Judeo-Christian culture and the Islamic culture. It is these perceived and interpreted differences that are the root cause of much of today’s terror and violence perpetrated against the West. Understanding that differences do exist, acknowledging that they exist and then being willing to take appropriate actions is the reason we must finally face this clear and present danger. Proper identification of the problem is the only way one can develop appropriate and effective answers. To continue to inaccurately identify the problem or to ignore or deny its existence can only mean we are unwilling to defend our way of life. I submit for consideration that this is our generation’s trial and, therefore, test.1
The context of this piece is to identify some of the overt behavioral differences between the Judeo-Christian and Muslim cultures. The author has no intention of indicating that the behaviors are doctrine driven; rather I do suggest that they are demonstrative of the influence each group’s culture has upon their resultant actions. For purposes of the discussion the following definition of culture has again been used:
“The totality of socially transmitted behavior patterns, arts, beliefs, institutions, and all other products of human work and thought. These patterns, traits, and products considered with respect to a particular category, such as a field, subject, or mode of expression…The predominating attitudes and behavior that characterize the functioning of a group or organization”.2
Knowledge, experiences, and interactions with people enable a person to develop his/her own personal belief system. Setting aside the role religion plays in development of one’s beliefs, the socialization and education of an individual certainly helps one form a point of view. The result of forming opinions about life, others and sense of morality is acted out as behavior that is reinforced by the participant’s social group. We are who we are in part because of whom we live with and with whom we develop. Mix in religious teachings and the essence of a human being is formed.
We, in America, understand this simple explanation of why people are different from one another. Those of us who grew up in the East find it odd, different and even difficult to live in the West-the way of life is so disparate from one another. On the other hand how many stories have we each heard about the native Californian deciding to leave his/her life, move to another state, only to return to California within 5 years. The reason so often given: “I just could not adapt to their way of thinking or acting-I needed to come home.” This is witnessed around our country daily and we even have developed a sense of humor about it. Therefore, it is quite easy to understand that our views and values, the manner in which we choose to live are significantly different from those people who live in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran, Malaysia - to identify but a few countries. Everything from how we dress, to what we eat, to how we greet people to behavioral expectations between men and women and so much more is as different as the sun and the moon. To dismiss that these differences exist is naïve and ignorant. To chastise those who point out the differences is demonstrative of one’s failure to tell the truth. It seems lately that identifying differences automatically puts one into a category of being intolerant or racist. What a pity, to tell the truth is the ethical and moral duty of a good person.
The USA is perhaps the largest example of an ongoing social experiment. We are still in the process of learning how to live cooperatively with so many different groups of people choosing to become part of our culture. We are still figuring it out. What has been missing for some time is what does it mean to be an American? A return to this discussion is crucial. I will offer only this: our country was founded on Judeo-Christian values and beliefs; we believe that English should be the primary language, we developed a Constitution grounded in the aforementioned values and we believe in a multitude of freedoms. From this foundation an entire American lifestyle has emerged-the result of commonly held beliefs –assimilation is still going on each day by people from many cultures. A code of operational behaviors is the result of the commonly held values. These translate into daily behaviors such as greetings, foods, speaking styles and clothing lines. Our life philosophy and thus our daily behavior is based upon the sum total of all the experiences we have had until today; we act in accordance with these. People are simply different.
It may be due to my own life perspicacity but I for one love the Western culture I live in and I choose it for my children and grandchildren. I do not support another culture coming into my country of origin and imposing itself upon me. I was taught from the time I could talk to always respect another’s person’s home and to not impose our family’s “way of doing things” on them. As I have traveled the world, I have adopted the same attitude. The fact is that visiting many other countries, particularly those in the Middle East and South Asia where Islam is the dominant religion, it is imperative that one not impose on others his/her “homegrown” behaviors; the consequences are severe. Yet, today, it is some practioners of Islam who want to impose their entire way of life upon us. The following represents only the tip of the iceberg:
The Minnesota chapter of the Muslim American Society, an organization the Chicago Tribune has established is devoted to turning the United States into a country run by Islamic law. The wife of a former head of the organization, for example, has explained that its goal is "to educate everyone about Islam and to follow the teachings of Islam with the hope of establishing an Islamic state."3
“The government of Saudi Arabia is distributing books and pamphlets across the United States in an effort to recruit American Muslims to an international struggle against Christians and Jews, the director of a religious freedom organization told the Senate Judiciary Committee Nov. 8.”4
Omar M. Ahmad Chairman of CAIR made the following statement a few years ago, "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran ... should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth." To be fair, I must note that CAIR announced that Omar Ahmad denied making the statement and CAIR was seeking a retraction from the newspaper that published the story on July 4, 1998. As a follow up side note Steve Waterhouse, editor of The Argus in Fremont, Calif., told WND his paper has not been contacted by CAIR. The article of denial also was run in a sister publication, the San Ramon Valley Herald. The paper's city editor, Dave Boitano, said he would have known if CAIR had sought a retraction. Interesting strategy CAIR employs.
Imam Siraj Wahaj, a CAIR board member, who is one of the most respected American Muslim leaders and is vice president of the Islamic Society of North America. Dr. Daniel Pipes reports that he "calls for replacing the U.S. government with a caliphate."
Still more efforts by Saudi Arabia to Spread (Wahhabi) Islam :
· "…The determination of the Kingdom to support Islam and Islamic institutions to the best of its ability was evident from the formation of the Kingdom by King Abdul Aziz but it was only when oil revenues began to generate real wealth that the Kingdom could fulfill its ambitions of spreading the word of Islam to every corner of the world, of assisting Muslim countries less well endowed economically and of alleviating the suffering of Muslim minorities wherever they might live."
· Efforts in the U.S."The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia under the leadership of King Fahd Ibn Abd Al-Aziz, has given support to the following institutions in the United States:
· Dar Al-Salam Institute, the Fresno Mosque in California
· Islamic Center in Colombia, Missouri
· Islamic Center in East Lansing, Michigan
· Islamic Center in Los Angeles, California
· Islamic Center in New Brunswick, New Jersey
· Islamic Center in New York
· Islamic Center in Tida, Maryland
· Islamic Center in Toledo, Ohio
· Islamic Center in Virginia
· Islamic Center in Washington
· Islamic Cultural Center in Chicago
· King Fahd Mosque in Los Angeles
· Mosque of the Albanian Community in Chicago
· South-West Big Mosque of Chicago
· Omar Ibn Al-Khattab Mosque in Los Angeles." 5
For your consideration: It is Islam and its practioners who proactively attempt and often demand to see to it that the international community operates under the veil of Islam. There is a major difference between Judaism, Christianity and Islam. “Islam was born with the idea that it should rule the world… Judaism speaks about national salvation… Christianity speaks about the idea that every single person in the world can be saved from his sins. Islam says "Allah sent Mohammed with the true religion so that it should rule over all the religions."6
The language we use is different as well as interpreted differently. There are many common day examples. Here in Israel what is reported in English to the media is reported the exact opposite in Arabic. Peace for our culture means to accept the other party, tolerate and empower the person and truly believe that conflict is over. In the Islamic world of interpretation there is but a hudna - temporary lull. Once the leaders feel they have more than enough power they immediately attack-there is no such concept as “peace”.
Even during wartime the West operates within certain rules or laws. “The civilized world believes in democracy, the rule of law, including international law, human rights, free speech and free press, among other liberties. There are naive old-fashioned habits such as respecting religious sites and symbols, not using ambulances and hospitals for acts of war, avoiding the mutilation of dead bodies and not using children as human shields or human bombs.”7
“The problem is that the civilized world is still having illusions about the rule of law in a totally lawless environment. It is trying to play ice hockey by sending a ballerina ice-skater into the ring or to knock out a heavyweight boxer by a chess player… The amazing thing is that all of these crooks demand protection under international law, and define all those who attack them as "war criminals," with some Western media repeating the allegations.”7
Judaism and Christianity are religions unto themselves. Not so with Islam. Nagdi Allam, born in Egypt, and today vice editor of the Corriere della Sera wrote that the root of evil was in the blind ideology of hatred by some Muslims, an ideology that was raping the faith…The problem is an internal Islamic problem since extremists have transformed the faith in God into an ideology which wants to impose a theocratic and totalitarian regime, he concluded.8
“Islam is not a religion as most Westerners understand it. For the Western media and apologetic thinkers, Islam is compared to Christianity, and Muslim groups in the European and American countries are defined as religious communities… But Islam is not a religion in this “narrow” sense. It is much more than that. It is a system of law, it is a social and political system; it is a way of life. It has full control over the behavior of the individual, the society, and the state. It deals with war and peace, it defines the relations between the Moslems and the rest of the world, and as we saw, it also determines the attitude to non-Muslims who are unfortunate enough to come under Islamic rule.”9
In the West we believe in freedom of speech, which includes criticizing as well as accepting criticism. This behavior comes directly from our Judeo-Christian values. This is absolutely not accepted nor true for many practicing Islam. The current examples are the Muslim world’s reactions to the Danish cartoons, to the words of a Pope quoting another writer and a teacher in France who has gone into hiding after receiving death threats. His offense? He published a column in the French newspaper Le Figaro in which he characterized the Muslim prophet Muhammad as “a merciless war chief, plunderer, slaughterer of Jews and a polygamist.”
The resultant behavior of this poor man’s honesty and accurate statement is the following:
Redeker said that one of the threats he received stated: “You will never feel secure on this earth. One billion, three hundred thousand Muslims are ready to kill you.” As the death threats poured in, everyone abandoned Redeker. The teacher himself noted that France’s education ministry “has not even contacted me, has not deigned to get in touch to see if I need any help.” The senior editor of Le Figaro, Pierre Rousselin, declared on Al-Jazeera that he had been mistaken to publish Redeker’s article, and hastened to assure the Islamic world that the article did not reflect the opinion of the paper.”10 Allow me to suggest that the Islamic rhetoric still seems to cause some people to lose any sense of ethics as well as any remaining courage they might have had.
It seems to me that the concept and application of multi-culturalism has had some unintended consequences-at least I hope they were unintended. For example, those of us who question the belief that everyone can live together peacefully are labeled anti this and “-ist” that; even in the hallowed halls of my academia I cannot have a reasonable discussion when I challenge my colleagues on this point. We have created a social consciousness that has invented “political correctness” as an operational behavior in our daily speaking lives. People are fearful of upsetting someone else or goodness gracious offending someone. This has lead to “passive acceptance” of others behavioral practices. We are not standing up to or by our internal behavioral principles. The consequences to each of us are enormous. The regretful results are dangerous to our country. Curiously political correctness does not seem to be part of other peoples’ culture and thus they are not bound by it. However, it is used against us and has highlighted our Achilles heel.
Finally, the concept of 'Pre-emptive obedience' is making a comeback in re-unified Germany and several other European countries. What is this? In Communist East Germany this meant guessing the future orders of the politburo and obeying them before they were issued. There have been many examples of this recently in Europe, although it has also presented itself in America.11 Here are but a few:
· It was based on "pre-emptive obedience" that the German Opera in Berlin decided to cancel its production of Mozart's Idomeneo after the managers decided that it might anger Muslims.
· In Spain, folkloric ceremonies and carnivals marking the expulsion of the Moors from Andalusia have been cancelled in all but a handful of villages, ending a 400-year old tradition.
· In most European countries, an official black of list of books has emerged, containing works deemed to be "hurtful to Muslim sentiments".11
This particular author cites many more examples of this behavior. The following line shouts at us: The practitioners of "pre-emptive obedience" often claim they are acting in accordance with the best principles of multiculturalism.11
It is time to awaken if one is asleep and for those who understand it is time to secure some courage and stand by the principles by which we live.
End Notes
Morris, GS Don ‘The Differences Among Us,” posted www.PRIMER.org, Oct. 10,2006
The American Heritage® Stedman's Medical Dictionary Copyright © 2002, 2001, 1995 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company.
“Apple’s Mecca project provokes Muslim reaction,” http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD131506, Oct. 11,2006
William Matthews, “Saudi books aim to divide U.S. Muslims, infidels, Congress told”, http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1232073.php , Nov. 20, 2005
'Billions Spent by Saudi Royal Family to Spread Islam to Every Corner of the Earth', MEMRI, March 27, 2002.
Moshe Sharon, “Agenda of Islam”, referenced in “The Differences Among Us”.
Haim Harari, “A View from the Eye of the Storm”,
Sergio I. Minerbi, “Is it good for the West?” Jerusalem Post, September 18, 2006
Moshe Sharon, Reviving the Caliphate, October, 2006
Robert Spencer, The Philosopher and the Fatwa, Front Page, Oct. 2, 2006
Amir Taheri, 'Pre-emptive obedience' at work, http://www.gulfnews.com/, Oct.12,2006
Special thank you to my editor-Chana Givon
See more at: http://docstalk.blogspot.com
Langganan:
Postingan (Atom)