Tuesday, June 06, 2006

Sensitivity Training in the Peaceable Kingdom

Kate at SDA has two blood-curdling posts up on political correctness in Canada. First we learn (via CBC Watch) of a 2005 memo from CBC News editor-in-chief Tony Burman to his minions and colleagues in liberal elitism:
'Terrorism'? Who's to say?: Informed sources
National Post
July 19, 2005

What follows is a memo distributed to CBC staff describing the CBC policy on use of the word 'terrorism.'

'Terrorist' and 'terrorism': Exercise extreme caution before using either word.

Avoid labelling any specific bombing or other assault as a "terrorist act" unless it's attributed (in a TV or Radio clip, or in a direct quote on the Web). For instance, we should refer to the deadly blast at that nightclub in Bali in October 2002 as an "attack," not as a "terrorist attack." The same applies to the Madrid train attacks in March 2004, the London bombings in July 2005 and the attacks against the United States in 2001, which the CBC prefers to call "the Sept. 11 attacks" or some similar expression. (The BBC, Reuters and many others follow similar policies.)

Terrorism generally implies attacks against unarmed civilians for political, religious or some other ideological reason. But it's a highly controversial term that can leave journalists taking sides in a conflict.

By restricting ourselves to neutral language, we aren't faced with the problem of calling one incident a "terrorist act" (e.g., the destruction of the World Trade Center) while classifying another as, say, a mere "bombing" (e.g., the destruction of a crowded shopping mall in the Middle East).
Then we learn of the preparations the RCMP made for the recent alleged terrorists:
Before the raids came the sensitivity training: Tactical-squad Mounties learned how to properly handle Korans prior to arresting 17 terrorism suspects on the weekend.

And that's not all. The RCMP also made sure there were clean prayer mats on hand for their suspects when they were sent to jail cells.

Then, after everything wrapped up, authorities met with a number of Muslim leaders to impress upon them that officers were going after specific individuals, not the community as a whole.

"Our officers need to be respectful," said RCMP spokeswoman Corporal Michele Paradis.

"We want to make sure the investigation is pristine."
Isn't it interesting how the Muslim fanatics' (or do I mean all real Muslims?, fifty percent? five?) deep concern with purification rituals and all things haram must now rub off on Canadian officialdom? I wonder if we will ever get to the point when terrorists have the right not to be arrested and handled by infidels. Without thinking like terrorists, I think we may however permit ourselves one wry smile at the news that one of the targets that the terrorists considered was CBC's Toronto broadcasting centre. (I will get a bit more reflective on issues of blood ritualism and post more here later in the day on the lead item in that story: the claim that another of the intended targets was the Prime Minister's head.)


Charles Henry said...

Well having read this cbc memo, now I'm ***really*** angry.

This reminds me of a conversation that the formidable Mrs Charles Henry reported having with a colleague, about Canadian troops in Afghanistan.

"Who are we to tell them how to live?" was the question posed to my wife. "We have no business being over there; we're hardly perfect ourselves."

The shielding cry of "Nobody's perfect" is no defense against the reality that things can always be improved.

Imperfection **is** reconcilable with progress. And is no excuse for withholding judgment.

A cutting difference between the philosophy of the right and that of the left, is that the left believes in perfection as an attainable goal, whereas the right does not. The left frequently acts on their beliefs, by taking no action, since “perfection” is so improbable an achievement. Their inaction leads to nihilism, and the abandonment of the moral order founded on a belief of “better and worse” more than “good and bad”.

There may occasions when we cannot shift things from "bad" to "good", but by God we can sure improve things from "bad" to "less bad". From “bad” to “better than before”.

It will be by embracing a far more long-term view that the left could possibly be shifted to start taking a moral stand, instead of only thinking in the moment. If one lives only in the present, then clean slates dictate trying nothing, building nothing, creating nothing. For if we try we may fail, defiling ourselves into becoming "failures".

The cbc are paralyzed by the same bonds with which islam strangles muslims: a world divived into two. Theirs is a limited world view of “perfect” and “imperfect”, “good and bad”, “pure” and “defiled”, with no expectation or opportunity for redemption should one slip from one to the other side of the divide: moral, economical, or otherwise.

Hey cbc: If you "take a side" that proves to be the wrong side, if you make a mistake, it doesn’t “defile” you; you can do what western civilization has always done:

You Atone for it.
You learn from your mistakes.
You Progress.

truepeers said...

Well said Charles! I think you capture the CBC types perfectly: they don't want to engage the world so much as float above it in their tax-payer supported bubbles, all the while telling the tax payer that all his prejudices about those whom he disrespectfully calls crazies are wrong. But maybe some belief systems are less advanced and more irrational than others: that's something the left will never honestly debate, for it would require facing up to one's own intellectual, moral, and spiritual inadequacies.