[DAWN] Here's a hypothetical situation: You have a 15-year-old son, and he hacks off his own hand after believing he has committed blasphemy. How would you react?
Shock? Horror? Perhaps, a few weeks of introspection wondering where you have gone wrong as a parent?
How about pride, joy, and celebration instead?
In Pakistain, where all sorts of bizarre reports make headlines, it isn't often that we sit up and take notice of news stories. Yet, this is exactly what happened recently, when a 15-year-old boy in a village close to Lahore in the Hujra Shah Muqeem district, cut off his own hand believing he had committed blasphemy.
As reports claim, the youngster was at a mosque when the imam asked the worshipers who among them wasn't offering prayers regularly. This was after he had stated that those who love the Prophet (PTUI!) don't miss out on their prayers.
When the boy raised his hand after mishearing the question, the imam, alongside the attendees around him, shamed the 15-year-old for committing blasphemy. Some reports even state that the boy was beaten by the holy man for his 'sin'.
The psychological impact of the public disgrace propelled the child. He wanted to prove beyond doubt that he was not a blasphemer.
So much so that to punish himself, using a fodder cutting machine, he sliced off the very hand he had raised at the mosque.
Then, the child presented his appendage to the preacher on a plate.
Rather than be appalled at the sight of a child's bloody hand, the neighbourhood cheered the youngster, hailing him a hero. His parents, too, beamed with pride.
Once you absorb the disturbing nature of this incident, you have to take pause.
You have to wonder about the established set of attitudes of the boy, his parents, the holy man, and the people of the entire village.
What kind of a people respond to such a gruesome act in a celebratory fashion?
Are we all OK with the way this boy was treated?
Clearly, we are.
More importantly, if the boy was so desperate to prove that he wasn't a blasphemer that he was willing to part with his own hand, what else was he prepared to do?
Posted by: Fred ||
01/17/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
#1
And yet we are asked, no demanded, to full embrace this culture and celebrate it in the name of multiculturism. We are encouraged to celebrate with the parents.
#8
He can't stop "going to the bathroom," though excreting may be the more correct term. Whether he can "clean himself" is absolutely a question to be asked.
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
01/17/2016 13:24 Comments ||
Top||
#9
The question goes to whether he now will be able to feed himself or go to the bathroom...
Now that you bring this up, it makes me think maybe the kid should have thought about this more than he did.
[DAWN] THE series of raids in Beautiful Downtown Peshawar ...capital of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (formerly known as the North-West Frontier Province), administrative and economic hub for the Federally Administered Tribal Areas of Pakistan. Peshawar is situated near the eastern end of the Khyber Pass, convenient to the Pak-Afghan border. Peshawar has evolved into one of Pakistan's most ethnically and linguistically diverse cities, which means lots of gunfire. against money changers possibly involved in illegal hundi and hawala transactions is a welcome development.
However, Caliphornia hasn't yet slid into the ocean, no matter how hard it's tried... far more effort is required to shut this business down. It is widely known that money changers deal in enormous amounts of cash on a daily basis, and dollars are literally auctioned on the streets in rapid makeshift markets that rise and disperse quickly.
The FIA has been active in the area for a while now, with some officials claiming that over 200 shops in the Chowk Yadgar area, where the money changers are located, have been sealed, 150 traders enjugged Drop the gat, Rocky, or you're a dead 'un! and 126 cases filed.
The KP apex committee discussed the possible role of Peshawar-based currency dealers in terrorism financing back in November. Then in late December, a leaked report reflected the concerns of the law-enforcement agencies about how the informal market for currency exchange in this area is being used for terrorism financing.
On Thursday, the FIA in KP conducted another large raid in the area and arrested 45 dealers.
There appears to be a strengthened push to clamp down on illegal hundi and hawala operators in Peshawar. Some of these operators engage in money transactions so large that there have been occasions -- admittedly rare though -- where their dealings have been felt at the State Bank and have possibly impacted the exchange rate.
Turnover volumes in the Peshawar clearinghouse, where all paper instruments such as cheques and pay orders are processed, are also amongst the largest in the country, after the cities of Lahore and Bloody Karachi ...formerly the capital of Pakistain, now merely its most important port and financial center. It is among the largest cities in the world, with a population of 18 million, most of whom hate each other and many of whom are armed and dangerous... .
Such massive volumes of turnovers, in paper clearing and currency exchange, in the absence of any visible economic activity is grounds for suspicion that a portion of these is very likely linked to illegal business and possibly even terrorism financing.
But it will take far more than the heavy hand of the state, or even the apex committee, to bring this business into the full light of day. A larger policy response is needed to shut down the capillaries of terrorism financing, rather than relying on periodic crackdowns and criminal prosecutions alone.
The federal government needs to do more to coordinate the overall effort against this lethal funding to supplement the efforts of the KP apex committee. Thus far, going after this kind of financing is one of the weaker links in the implementation of the National Action Plan.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/17/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[1 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
[DAWN] DID we need President B.O. to tell us we are doomed to instability and krazed killer violence for another decade or more? I think not. But then do we ever take notice of our own accord of where we are headed, without someone abroad having to shake and wake us up?
The US president's 'assessment' came in his last State of the Union address of his second and final term in office and drew the usual response from Pakistain as foreign affairs adviser Sartaj PrunefaceAziz ...Adviser to Pak Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on National Security and Foreign Affairs, who believes in good jihadis and bad jihadis as a matter of national policy... characterised Obama's view as being not based on ground realities.
Continued on Page 49
Posted by: Fred ||
01/17/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[0 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistain Proxies
[DAWN] "IN the recent history of relations between India and Pakistain, it has seemed an immutable law: that any apparent political breakthrough will be followed by a terrorist atrocity in India blamed on agents of the Pakistain state." Further, "to call off the dialogue gives the Death Eaters what they want".
This is what The Economist said a week after the terrorist attack on the air force base in Pathankot. There was a terrorist attack in Gurdaspur on 27 July last. It is all very reminiscent of the train blasts in Mumbai in July 2006 and the terrorist attacks in Mumbai on Nov 26, 2008.
The one common feature in all these outrages in the decade from 2006 to 2016 is that they were perpetrated in the phase when détente in the relations between India and Pakistain seemed promising.
There is, however, a marked difference between the reaction to the Pathankot incident and the one to the 2008 Mumbai attacks. The consensus is in favour of proceeding with that process while seeking redress for the wrongs; by making an end to terrorism the first item on the agenda of the talks.
The most significant comment came from the moderate All Parties Hurriyat Conference headed by Mirwaiz Umar Farooq. "As we have seen in the past, whenever there is a serious effort made by India and Pakistain to resolve issues, incidents like this have taken place with the aim to derail the dialogue process. The elements who seek to vitiate the atmosphere and derail the dialogue process are working against the interest of the people of South Asia."
It urged the prime ministers "to carry forward and work together to try and rid the region of conflict and violence".
There are fundamental differences between the reactions to Pathankot and Mumbai. One is India's trust in Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif ... served two non-consecutive terms as prime minister, heads the Pakistain Moslem League (Nawaz). Noted for his spectacular corruption, the 1998 Pak nuclear test, border war with India, and for being tossed by General Musharraf... This explains India's Home Minister Rajnath Singh's statement on Jan 12: "The Pak government has said it will take effective action. I think we should wait."
He referred to press reports of the government of Pakistain executing the arrest of some persons suspected of complicity in the Jan 2 attack and to the high-level team it had set up to look into the evidence given by the Indian government.
He pointedly said, "Since they have given an assurance to the Indian government, we don't have any reason to doubt them. We should wait for some time. There is no reason to distrust them as of now."
But this also raises expectations in India. If results are not forthcoming -- as in the Mumbai case -- the trust will be transformed into bitter disappointment. Diplomacy must work its way despite acts of terrorism.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi told his host at Lahore, on Dec 25: "Ab yahan aana jaana laga rahega" (Now there will be visits). Those who attacked the Pathankot air force base must be renewing their sordid resolve as doggedly.
Is it not time that a durable, effective mechanism against terrorism was devised, simultaneously with action against the culprits in Pakistain, for the countries to set in motion whenever the holy warriors launch an attack? Former prime minister Manmohan Singh and president Pervez Perv Musharraf ... former dictator of Pakistain, who was less dictatorial and corrupt than any Pak civilian government to date ... had devised one at Havana in 2006 but it got nowhere for political reasons.
In 2008, the two countries came fairly close to evolving one on an ad hoc basis. Had it succeeded, it would have laid the basis for a permanent accord. Reportedly, when the two prime ministers spoke on the phone soon after the attacks, Manmohan Singh invited the director general of the ISI. This was agreed to but then the ISI objected.
The crucial question is the degree of cooperation in the investigation. Sending the intelligence chief was too much to expect of any state. Very soon after the announcement, it was clarified that someone of lower rank would go; the director general following him, if need be.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/17/2016 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
[Telegraph] If the West carries on admitting large numbers of migrants it must insist they respect our values
In 1993, when I was 17 and my sister were 12 and 11, our family moved to the Turkish capital, Ankara, because of my father's job with the UN's refugee agency, the UNHCR. For the next two years we were leered at, jeered at, hissed at, groped and touched, again and again and again, every single time we left the house. The only time this treatment lessened was if we went out with my father. Once I was groped and hit in the face right outside the president's palace. The guards responded by hooting and laughing and shoving their pelvises at me.
Of course, not all Muslim men behave this way. Not all Muslim societies allow such misogynistic behaviour. I have never been insulted by, say, a sub-Saharan African Muslim or an Indonesian. But the confluence of certain cultural mores with particular interpretations of Islam, and particular understandings about Western women, can produce the toxic brew I've experienced.
For example, when we were in The Sick Man of Europe Turkey ...the only place on the face of the earth that misses the Ottoman Empire.... , dark-haired Western women suffered significantly less harassment and we concluded that this was happening because we were pale and blonde. Male Muslim friends later confirmed that many of their peers consider all Western women "whores", but associate this most strongly with blonde women. Why? We are rarer, more distinct from "their" women, and still highly objectified in our own societies. They associate us with the peroxide performers they see involved in sexual acrobatics in pornographic films and assume this is an accurate portrayal of who we are.
To me, this is akin to thinking all Arab and North African-looking men must be jacket wallahs because the murderous Moslems we see on TV look like them. Such a blanket association would, rightly, not be acceptable in liberal, Western society. Yet this same society seems to shy away from holding men from Muslim backgrounds to similar standards.
It is this that disturbs me almost as much as the mass sexual molestation in Germany. It makes me fear for the future. To begin with the police in Cologne tried not to publicise the ethnicity of the attackers. The city's mayor suggested women keep their distance. Perhaps she thinks they should cover their hair too?
I gave up talking to people about how I was treated by Muslim men a long time ago. Most became uncomfortable, muttered things about cultural sensitivity, or accused me of racism. Yet Islam is not a race, it is a religion; a belief system, a set of cultural constructs and values that are open to interpretation and change. Being white, blonde and female, on the other hand, are constants.
Naturally, the West is not always a bastion of sexual equality and respect. But in my experience the worst examples of misogyny do come from Muslim societies, and disproportionate numbers of Muslim men hold misogynist views. So while we must respect the plight of refugees, I have rights too. So do those German women who were, in my view, subjected too a hate crime. Certainly my attackers always left me feeling hated and dehumanised.
If liberal Europe wants to continue with the current level of Muslim immigration it needs to have an urgent debate about how much cultural relativity it is prepared to tolerate. It needs to stop clinging to the idea that "cultural imperialism" is a purely white western thing, or that to criticise aspects of another culture is to criticise all of it. We need to decide what our values are, protect them and insist that new arrivals respect them.
The harassment I suffered has left a lasting legacy, left me deeply distrustful of all male attention. Intimate relationships have been problematic and I ended up having a child on my own. I don't want my daughter to be distorted by similar experiences.
Jessica McCallin is a journalist who has worked in the Middle East
Posted by: Sven the pelter ||
01/17/2016 5:56 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Islamists teach muslim men they are superior to all women
they teach muslim women to wear a hijab to show modesty, and that they are better than the *bad* muslim women who wont wear a hijab
those who do not wear a hijab are thus *immodest*
Non-muslim women are fair game
Western women who wear no hijab, go out alone, have boyfriends of their own choosing and sex before marriage -- well now they are flat out sluts who are gagging for it. Take your pick and rape or grope them, even if they are 12 years old. That is why there is a huge problem with muslim rape gangs. mohammad took non-muslim women as sex slaves. That is the example.
Imams teach that uncovered women are like uncovered meat - and to blame for their own attacks.
it is so common it has a term *slut shaming* and is something progressive muslim women fight against to no avail
Apologies for the delayed post. Things. Suddenly it was 21:00 and I threw my hands.
I wanted to take a break from the history of the Mediterranean's historical competition and look at some of the good things going on in Europe, specifically the art of Italy during this time period, with the book Michelangelo & the Pope's Ceiling, Ross King, Walker Publishing Company 2003.
However, the combination of the proposition that the Huguenot movement as a foundation for the 2nd Amendment, the mentioning of La Rochelle, and even today the book topic at Ace of Spades concerning the behavior of the various Native Americans spurred me to stay on the path.
Champlain's Dream
David Hackett Fischer
Simon and Schuster, 2008
If a person were to read Roger Crowley's series, Champlain's Dream is a great relay as it begins in this same time period, late 16th century, and covers what was going on in France and Europe in general, something only mentioned in the Mediterranean centric series by Roger Crowley, and I mean no offense as it would have clogged Mr. Crowley's focus. Champlain's Dream is better described as complimentary to that series.
David Hackett Fischer writes with the same fluidity as Roger Crowley, but in a bit different fashion, and in a way makes quoting the book a bit difficult in a good way. Mr. Fischer's style is a fine weave a paragraphs where making an accurate quote in context would require pages a reference. I will do my best.
The books of Mr. Fischer I have read would read best in this order: Champlain's Dream, Paul Revere's Ride, then Washington's Crossing. If I were a betting man I would put Albion's Seed in between Champlain's Dream and Paul Revere's Ride.
To tie in with badanov's This Week in Guns, to understand the 2nd Amendment's history Mr. Fischer's books are a must read. Were the Huguenots solely responsible for the concept of citizens desire to be armed? In my opinion, and in a word, no. The United States, specifically the English colonies, were populated by numerous peoples who fled their respective local persecutions and violence of what was then a very unstable Europe. One could argue that it was France's interest in the New World which would eventually lead to what we would call The French-Indian War where random attacks on a civilian population would require local militia to defend themselves. So to propose the Huguenots led to this attitude, then Samuel de Champlain would have had a leading role; but then, who was Samuel de Champlain?
Champlain's Dream approaches France's difficulties in this time. Mr. Fischer begins his book with a ponder of Champlain and his book's cover art. The first illustration in the book is the block print, "Deffaite des Yroquis au Lac de Champlain," 1613.
The print offers an explanation in the presence of a small figure who stands alone at the center of the battle. His dress reveals that he is a French soldier and a man of rank. He wears half-armor of high quality: a well fitted cuirass on his upper body, and protective britches of the latest design with light steel plates on his thighs. His helmet is no ordinary morion, or crude iron pot of the kinds that we associate with Spanish conquistadors and English colonists. It is an elegant example of what the French call a casque bourgignon, a Burgundian helmet of distinctive design that was the choice of kings and noblemen - a handsome, high-crowned helmet with a comb and helm forged from a single piece of metel. Above the helmet is a large plume of white feathers called a panache - the origin of our modern word. Its color identifies the wearer as a captain in the service of Henri IV, first Bourbon king of France. Its size marks it as a badge of courage worn to make its wearer visible in battle.
The French captain is not a big man. Even with his panache, the Indians appear half a head taller. But he has a striking presence, and in the middle of a wild melee he stands still and quiet, firmly in command of himself. His back is straight as a ramrod. His muscular legs are splayed apart and firmly planted to bear the weight of a weapon which he holds at full length. It is not a conventional matchlock, as historians have written, but a complex and very costly arquebuse a rouet, a wheel-lock arquebus. It was the first self-igniting shoulder weapon that did not require a burning match, and could fire as many as four balls in a single shot.
....
We look back at the French captain and catch a glimpse of his face. He has a high forehead, arched brows, eyes set wide apart, a straight nose turned up at the tip, a fashionable mustache, and a beard trimmed like that of his king, Henri IV. The key below the print gives us his name, the "sieur de Champlain."
This small image is the only authentic likeness of Samuel de Champlain that is known to survive from his own time.
...
Other images of Champlain would be invented after the fact. Many years later, when he was recognized as the father of New France, he was thought to require a proper portrait. Artists and sculptors were quick to supply a growing market. Few faces in modern history have been reinvented so often and from so little evidence. All these images are fictions. The most widely reproduced was a fraud, detected many years ago and still used more frequently than any other.
Mr. Fischer's eleven pages in introduction must simply be read. As to Mr. Fischer's approach to history, his well researched topic, and honesty I include this quote: (page 7)
Champlain was a leader, but he was not a saint. We do not need another work of hagiography about him. He was a mortal man of flesh and blood, a very complicated man. He made horrific errors in his career, and some of his mistakes cost other men their lives. He cultivated an easy manner, but sometimes he drove his men so hard that four of them tried to murder him. His quest for amity and concord with the Indians led to wars with the Mohawk and the Onondaga. His private life was deeply troubled, particularly in his relations with women. Champlain lived comfortably as a man among men, but one discovery eluded this great discoverer. He never found the way to a woman's heart. It was not for want of trying. He was strongly attracted to women, but his most extended relationship ended in failure.
And then I smiled, as this was what I was taught: (page 8)
At the start of the twentieth century, a very large literature ran heavily to hagiography, and celebrated Champlain as a saintly figure. After 1950 the inevitable reaction set in. Popular debunkers and academic iconoclasts made Champlain a favorite target. These attacks were deepened by a fin-de-siècle attitude called political correctness, with its revulsion against great white men, especially empire-builders, colonial founders, and discoverers.
Incredibly, some apostles of political correctness even tried to ban the word "discovery" itself. Historian Peter Pope met this attitude on the 500th anniversary of John Cabot's northern voyage of discovery. He recalls: "I was asked by a servant of the P.R industry in June 1995 to summarize Cabot's achievement without using the term discovery. She told me it had been banned. Any talked of 'discovery' is understood as an endorsement of conquest." Pope was ordered to "describe what the Venetian pilot did without using the D-word."
The book is well referenced. The illustrations are of good quality and topic. Mr. Fischer's style engaging. The story so full that it is impossible to quote without re-typing the book in full. Where there is controversy, Mr. Fischer notes it. Where is discussion, Mr. Fischer brings in all sides fairly. And so Mr. Fischer begins in Brouage, its history, the region's culture, and who was a young Samuel de Champlain.
#2
Thanks. A couple topics Champlain/Mr. Fischer note concerning the linked print (link in the text, main link to Amazon):
These Indians did not like each other. At all. The way they treated their captives suggests a generational struggle. Champlain lived and fought through the Religious Wars where Mr. Fischer notes somewhere between 2 and 4 million were killed, and he is appalled by his ally's behavior, and it was explained that is how both sides treat captives.
Second, the battle formation of the Indians. I would best describe it as olde Greek. We are used to Indians being depicted as owls swooping to forest onto mice. In a land unvisited by Europeans and gunpowder unheard of, they line up abreast with the leaders out front and charge.
That is Champlain + 2 French and 60 allies vs. 200 Mohawk sallying from their wood fort. One can imagine the image of this short white fellow in color and armor standing by himself and suddenly putting shots into the Mohawk leaders, then Champlain's two buddies firing from concealment, and the book goes into detail, the confusion created really on both sides.
Like him or hate him, the man was phenomenal. An amazing amount of time at sea, including some 23 (?) voyages across the Atlantic and back, losing only one ship in his command ever, and that was because the Captain panicked in a storm, Champlain took command and beached it. Everyone survived.
And I was taught in school Champlain was some French Jesus who went to live among the Indians to prepare them against the coming European savages destined to disorder the amiable love circle of Indians, and showed that by living with love and rejecting the virus of European war different people can live side by side with lollypops and sugar canes. Mr. Fischer tells Champlain's odyssey as a story, not the conquest of a saint or a warmonger.
#3
The United States, specifically the English colonies, were populated by numerous peoples who fled their respective local persecutions and violence of what was then a very unstable Europe.
[Variety] A spokesman for the CIA is criticizing the Michael Bay movie "13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi" as a "distortion of the events and people who served in Benghazi that night." 'Distortion'....? Alright then, declassify the message traffic and set the record straight.
The spokesman, Ryan Trapani, was quoted in an exclusive Washington Post story, which also features an interview with the CIA chief in Benghazi on Sept. 11, 2012, when Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others were killed in a siege of the diplomatic compound and attack on the CIA annex.
"No one will mistake this movie for a documentary," Tripani told the Post. "It's a distortion of the events and people who served in Benghazi that night. It's shameful that, in order to highlight the heroism of some, those responsible for the movie felt the need to denigrate the courage of other Americans who served in harm's way."
Tripani did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The CIA base chief, identified only as "Bob," takes issue with a key point in the movie, when he tells the six contractors to "stand down" before responding to calls for help at the nearby diplomatic compound. The movie shows the contractors waiting for more than 20 minutes before bucking orders and leaving to try to save Stevens and others. IMHO, with a few exceptions, "Bob" represented the quintessential CIA career employee. Kudo's to the director, actor, and technical advisors. They nailed "Bob." A tragic confirmation might be found at FOB Chapman and the largest number of Agency personnel killed in one day. These klueless fok's WILL get you killed.
"There was never a stand-down order," the CIA chief told the Post. "At no time did I ever second-guess that the team would depart." The CIA chief told the Post that he spent about 20 minutes trying to enlist local security teams.
#1
and these two have no incentive to lie? Riiigghht
Posted by: Frank G ||
01/17/2016 12:07 Comments ||
Top||
#2
"distortion of the events..."
The basic events are:
1- Troops in contact.
2- Help available.
3- Help not sent.
4- Troops die.
5- CIC attends fundraiser.
Where's the distortion?
Posted by: Matt ||
01/17/2016 12:33 Comments ||
Top||
#3
The CIA chief actually confirmed the story given in the movie. He says that he did not "second guess that the team would not be allowed to depart".
This does not mean that he did not tell them to wait or to stand down.
He said also that he spent twenty minutes trying to enlist local support. This is consistent with the claim of the contractors that they waited for twenty minutes, and even that he once said "stand down" or "leave me alone" while he was frustrated at failing to get response from outside locals.
He is saying only that his motives for his delaying actions were pure; he was concerned that if he succeeded in getting outside help, the contractors might come into conflict with the helpers, and cause casualties that might be blamed on him.
Of course he should have been consulting his superiors to get outside US support which apparently was overhead.
Someone somewhere decided that the military should not intervene.
My belief is this was based on the foolish state department fear that only state department personnel were protected by treaty from prosecution for injury to Libyans.
Often what appear to be callous and foolish decisions are based on preoccupation of the decision makers with nonsensical distractions.
That is the very nature of incompetence.
#5
There is only one person authorized to make such a decision.
IIRC, on that fatefull night POTUS handed the keys to SECDEF and retired to the west wing. With a clandestine Klingon shop and an under the radar State "consulate" setting up an arms conduit it's not surprising uncle Leon was squeemish about sending in the calvery.
#9
If I were Bob I would be upset about all the bad press. As someone who is not Bob, I take issue with him. In the book he comes across as a real ass. His public statements are only reinforcing that impression.
h/t Instapundit
It is almost a truism among psychological researchers that conservatives are simple-minded and dogmatic. Liberals, meanwhile, are supposed to be more complex and open-minded thinkers. But a new paper is calling those conclusions into question.
Writing in the journal Political Psychology, a team of researchers led by the University of Montana psychologist Lucian Gideon Conway III reports the results of four studies that together call "into question the typical interpretation that conservatives are less complex than liberals." It turns out that liberals and conservatives are both simple-minded, depending on the topic under discussion.
Using the dogmatism scale devised in 1960 by the psychologist Milton Rokeach, who defined dogmatism in terms of "closed belief systems," researchers have generally found a positive relationship between dogmatism and political conservatism. But while the Rokeach scale is supposed to be politically neutral, Conway and his colleagues argue that it actually includes a number of topics for which conservatives generally have a greater concern, such as religion and national defense. Conservatives who fill out the scale would more tend to come off as more dogmatic largely because they are endorsing conservative views.
So for their first study, Conway and his colleagues modified the Rokeach dogmatism scale by including items reflecting alternatively environmentalist and religious views. For example, item 7 reads alternatively: "When it comes to differences of opinion in protecting the environment/religion we must be careful not to compromise with those who believe differently from the way we do."
...They note that liberals scored high for dogmatism in response to these three items:
9. There are two kinds of people in this world: those who are for the truth that the planet is warming and those who are against that obvious truth.
3. When it comes to stopping global warming, it is better to be a dead hero than a live coward.
10. A person who thinks primarily of his/her own happiness, and in so doing disregards the health of the environment (for example, trees and other animals), is beneath contempt.
The researchers point out, "Those are not just statements about having an environmental position: They are explicitly and overwhelmingly dogmatic statements. And liberals are more likely to agree with such sentiments--for an environmental domain." The liberal respondents are not just asserting "'I am an environmentalist' but rather 'all people who disagree with me are fools.'" IMO, we're living in the age when "Liberalism is the first refuge of scoundrel".
#3
OTOH, Reason Magazine shows every day how stuff can be overthought to the same embarrassing end...
Posted by: M. Murcek ||
01/17/2016 11:50 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I think you're gonna be dogmatic if the words "empirical" and "predictable" don't carry any meaning for you. You either believe in cause and effect or you believe what you're told.
Posted by: Fred ||
01/17/2016 14:52 Comments ||
Top||
#5
Perhaps they deem themselves complex over the mental gymnastics necessary to square everything with what is current truth - or just quit thinking altogether and serf the current truth.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
...Adviser to Pak Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif on National Security and Foreign Affairs, who believes in 
[DAWN] "IN the recent history of relations between India and Pakistain, it has seemed an immutable law: that any apparent political breakthrough will be followed by a terrorist atrocity in India blamed on agents of the Pakistain state." Further, "to call off the dialogue gives the 
There is, however, a marked difference between the reaction to the Pathankot incident and the one to the 2008 Mumbai attacks. The consensus is in favour of proceeding with that process while seeking redress for the wrongs; by making an end to terrorism the first item on the agenda of the talks.
Pervez 
