Real terror is fear

I remember in my college days in the late 70’s and early 80’s taking a course in International Law with Professor Jean-Robert Leguey-Feilleux Ph.D.  The course included a discussion of terrorism. Dr. Leguey-Feilleux told us one of the issues before the United Nations and the international community was a definition of “terrorism.” The best definition of “terrorism” I remember, and the one I believe my instructor endorsed, was “the taking of innocents for political purposes.”

Terrorism was not killing, but may cause death and certainly fear. Terrorism is political. In another class, I read that David Easton defined “politics” as “the authoritative allocation of values.” So “terrorism” is the taking of innocents in an attempt to influence how people or peoples allocate their values. The primary motivator in any such effort is fear. The absence of fear negates the intent of the terrorist. But fear may motivate others to seek gain from the tactical terrorist efforts for strategic purposes. I believe such is the goal of the Bush administration and the Republican Party in the United States.

During the 40 or so years of the Cold War, the Republican right could be counted upon to rant about Democrats being “soft on Communism” and take an electoral victory in the White House which was only interrupted by Kennedy’s “missile gap,” Johnson’s “Great Society” (following JFK’s assassination) and the blip of Jimmy Carter after Watergate.  After the rise in expectations after the growth and success of the Solidarity movement in Poland, due …

Share

Continue ReadingReal terror is fear

Is the tide turning?

This, from the Associated Press: In a triple setback for conservatives, South Dakota rejected a law that would have banned virtually all abortions, Arizona became the first state to defeat an amendment to ban gay marriage and Missouri approved a measure backing stem cell research. Perhaps the voters are expressing…

Continue ReadingIs the tide turning?

Mission accomplished by political hack/video hacker

Why is the White House afraid to show Bush's 2003 aircraft carrier "Mission Accomplished speech" in its full glory?  Why has the video available on the White House site been so obviously hacked? Maybe the answer is best shown through statistics:                  At Mission Accomplished    Since Mission Accomplished U.S. Troops wounded          542                            21,077…

Continue ReadingMission accomplished by political hack/video hacker

Recapturing humility for Christianity

Andrew Sullivan uses a Barack Obama's interview on the meaning of religion as a launching point for a recent post.  Here are Obama's words: "I think this is the historical moment we're in — we have come to define religion in absolutist, fundamentalist terms. So to be a believer is to be…

Continue ReadingRecapturing humility for Christianity

“I’m not an animal!” cried the human animal.

Go ask one of those opponents of stem cell research why it’s OK to donate a kidney.  They’ll look at you like you’re nuts.  They’ll tell there’s a person who’s about to die and another person with an extra kidney, and it’s all that simple.

In 2006 you won’t hear any protest that kidney donation is something Frankenstein would do. Stem cell research opponents won’t assert that the extra kidney constitutes a “human life” even though it is alive and human.  They won’t tell you that kidney transplants are morally wrong.  They won’t claim that a kidney has an invisible soul.

Instead, they will reassure you that a spare kidney is not a unique human being.  They will tell you that kidney cells are only “potential” human beings (reproductive cloning, illegal in most countries, could accomplish this).  As icing on the cake, they will assert that kidneys don’t feel any pain. 

At that point you’ll need to jump in. For starters, you might remind the stem cell research opponents that blastocysts (from which stem cells are harvested) are clumps of about 150 cells small enough to fit inside Roosevelt’s eye on a U.S. dime

howbig.JPG

You might then add that blastocysts are only five days old when the stem cells are harvested.  At this point in time, the stem cells are pluripotent: they can develop into all the different cell types in the body (except the placenta), but they have not yet developed into any specialized type of cell.  …

Share

Continue Reading“I’m not an animal!” cried the human animal.