Doc's Talk

Sunday, October 29, 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

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.