The values we live by.
Entering into all these lands is the values we live by. At the top of those values is the "right to life." I am not talking about abortion, this is about the right to every living creature to a life as prescribed by birth. Only at birth does any creature have a right to breath. So, that said, all the people that live in the Holy Land have a right to breath the air, drink the water, eat the food, and have shelter. The very basics of "the values we live by," begins with essential needs for survival. All these are extremely well documented by doctors of mental health and the earliest father of all that is human, Wilhelm Wundt. He would eventually be followed not only in understanding human psychology, but, the definition and practice of psychoanalysis, by Sigmund Freud.
I am not interested in an in-depth understanding of psychology, psychoanalysis, or it history and development into the practices of today. That is a very different set of discussions. What I want to ring clear is that there is an in depth understanding as to what the values we live by means in definition and practice.
Do we understand our own needs? Do we practice survival tactics that protect our needs, hence, survival? Do our laws and the order brought by those laws reflect our needs that lead to improved and ongoing quality of life improvements. The answer, of course, is yes. Human beings like to live to survive and improve on that survival into high quality of that life. It is everywhere in societies around the world. Ultimately, there is an internal drive by most people in a society to achieve, COMFORT.
COMFORT.
COMFORT.
Coming to an understanding as to what comfort means to the people in the region of the Arabian Peninsula and the Mediterranean Sea begins to define CULTURAL difference. These are not differences in life itself or the allowance of human beings to breath the air, etc. Every ethnicity in this region of The Holy Land is allowed cultural difference, but, they are not allowed to achieve that with hatred for others in the region or their society.
What one of the most meaningful definitions of life brought by the British Empire and today's British Commonwealth is the right to difference, the right to live a comfortable life, and the RESPECT of lives of others with cultural differences.
I am not interested in tabloid answers.
Does that not reflect the values we live by? Nowhere in the world is there more difference than in the Middle East. There are world religions that call the Middle East home. There are an enormous number of ethnicity within that region of the world. There are language differences, sometimes considered barriers when understanding of difference is important to MAINTAIN domestic peace. The only other part of the world with greater language differences/barriers is Africa. I think that is reflected, especially in northern Africa with conflict and violence. Barriers to understanding cause résistance to acceptance between people. That confusion of values between people can become very threatening. When a people feel threatened it can very easily launch into war.
There is a difference between confusion of values and hatred and bigoty. Confusion of values is inherent, but, hatred and bigotry are learned and CHOSEN.
I asked at the beginning of this to remember the year 1979. Just previous to that year was a conference conducted by the late Secretary of State Henry Kissinger called the "Geneva Middle East Peace Conference (click here)." The style of that conference was that of civilized discourse. it was to bring about a deeper understanding by all parties to facilitate peace. There is that word again.
...The detail of the future Israeli-Egyptian January 1974 Disengagement Agreement (click here) had been worked out prior to the conference. Indeed, Foreign Ministers from Israel, Egypt, and Jordan attended the conference “aimed at establishing a just and durable peace in the Middle East.” Syrian President Hafez al-Assad chose not to attend because the United States and Israel refused to recognize the PLO as the representative body for the Palestinians at the conference since the PLO refused to recognize Israel’s right to exist. And nothing that Assad heard from Kissinger made him believe that Israel was willing to leave any part of the Golan Heights. Syrian President Assad had correctly sensed that the coming conference was only a cover for an Egyptian-Israeli agreement....The Nobel Peace Prize 1994 (click here)
Yasser ArafatShimon Peres
Yitzhak Rabin
...In 1974, (click here) the PLO was officially recognised by the Arab League and the United Nations General Assembly as the “sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people”, and was invited to participate in all UN activities under observer status. In 1988, it endorsed a two-state solution to the conflict with Israel. Since 2012, the PLO sits at the UN as a non-member state, Palestine, and is a signatory to UN treaties as well as agreements with Israel....
The scenario of these two people never become peaceful. There have been document after document filed for attempts at peace and establishing homelands for them, but, from the time they are conceived by the League of Nations was there ever a two country solution because the way it was organized never separated sovereign borders. All the documents time and again demanded these people live with borders within each other. The organization of these two people into separate countries was never clearly established. On the ground, the actual living of the people developed into power conflicts and not clear understandings of "...this side of the line is your country and this side is mine."
This confusion of values were not choices. They were inherent to the very lives of these people. The confusion turned into conflict and what resulted was a PLO defined as a terrorist organization. It would be the first time a terrorist organization in the Middle East actually represented people of The Holy Land.
A political and military body formed in 1964 (click here) to unite various Palestinian Arab groups in opposition to the Israeli presence in the former territory of Palestine. From 1967 the organization was dominated by al-Fatah, led by Yasser Arafat. The activities of its radical factions caused trouble with the host country, Jordan, and, following a brief civil war in 1970, it moved to Lebanon and Syria. In 1974 the organization was recognized by the Arab nations as the representative of all Palestinians. The Israeli invasion of Lebanon (1982) undermined its military power and organization, and it regrouped in Tunisia. Splinter groups of extremists, such as the ‘Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine’ and the ‘Black September’ terrorists, have been responsible for kidnappings, hijackings, and killings both in and beyond the Middle East. In 1988 Arafat persuaded the movement to renounce violence, and its governing council recognized the State of Israel. Thereafter the PLO was accepted by an increasing number of states as being a government-in-exile. In 1993 Arafat became chair of the Palestinian National Authority, which administered the West Bank and the Gaza Strip from 1995. The PLO continued to be responsible for negotiations with Israel, but these broke down in 2000. In 2004 Mahmoud Abbas became leader of the PLO following Arafat's death.
Yassin was am Imam and the word Fatah came into the dialogue.
Fatah, political and military organization of Arab Palestinians, founded in the late 1950s by Yassir Arafat and Khalīl al-Wazīr (Abū Jihād) with the aim of wresting Palestine from Israeli control by waging low-intensity guerrilla warfare. In the late 1980s it began seeking a two-state solution through diplomatic avenues, and its leaders were prominent players in the Oslo peace process that established the Palestinian Authority.The point of this is the INTRODUCTION of terrorist organizations as legitimate vehicles for ? human rights?
The United Nations is supposed to be a peace seeking organization where human rights has some of the highest values within it's charter. These boys didn't care about human rights in the same way the charter does. These boys were interested in their own idea of human rights and the world be damned.
Yassin would go on to form Hamas. This is the first time a terrorist organization known for violence would be guided by an Imam. Now, with Hamas as a leadership organization with rock solid hatred based in Jihad and Fatah as it's means of inspiring war and conflict the Middle East is completely lost to the peace process in a meaningful way that most of the world understands and understood. Instead, Hamas had a better method, let's just kill Israelis.
The cruelty and hatred that reigned over the Holy Land with the empowerment of terrorists resulted in real power. The Israeli Prime Minister with the most determined pursuit of ending that power saw a vision of a land called Gaza belonging to the Palestinian people. Now, Gaza at the time was occupied by Israeli settlements. When the word came down about Gaza being an icon of peace between the two peoples, there was a mad rush by every Rabi in Gaza to take possession of scrolls and head for the border. What occurred after Israel vacated Gaza was a complete expression of hate and continued conflict and never the peace the Late Prime Minister Sharon hoped and prayed for as an answer to the power of terrorists.
August 10, 2015By Luke Baker
A decade on from Israel's unilateral withdrawal of around 8,500 Jewish settlers from the Gaza Strip, the legacy of that August 2005 "disengagement" still provokes angry debate in Israeli society....
Hong Kong is a very successful and beautiful city. It is a unique place on Earth. People and companies from all over the world congregate there and why? Because Hong Kong is a center of commerce. There is also wealth in Hong Kong. My intention in bringing this up is not to discuss China's inability to cope with such a wonderful city and it's people, but, to clearly understand the confusion of values between these two people and societies.
The hopes of the peace the Late Sharon envisioned was to provide a valuable piece of land to bring the Palestinian people the OPPORTUNITY to become a dynamo of society and join the rest of the world in celebration of life. That was a hope that was clearly confused with the actual hate that was propagated by The Sheik and his cohorts.
This is the confusion that is carried forward by ALLOWING terrorist organizations recognition as any form of leadership. Are their values the values we all inherently share? Hell no!
How in the right mind of diplomacy will there ever be an agreement that will result in sincere peace AND PROSPERITY so long as the very basis of governance is mired in hatred and violence? A peace can never exist with such confusion among the values sought in the process.
continued in the next entry
