Post by Daniel on Aug 10, 2015 9:24:52 GMT -5
Talking to Liberals About Iran Is a Perilous Art Form
By Dr. Phyllis Chesler August 5, 2015
A friend, a woman of refinement and sensitivity–a good liberal–unexpectedly just shocked me. We usually make it a point to steer clear of our known differences as the only way to enjoy what we have in common.
I had emailed twenty five photos of my recent trip to the Norwegian fjords accompanied by 800 words of text to a group of friends. In response to 69 (or 9 %) of these words, thiswoman wrote back:
“Your photographs are exquisite. And I am sure that in person these views were even more wondrous. We can’t wait to talk to you about the whole trip. I take it that you prefer that Iran continue building a nuclear bomb right now. I disagree.”
My friend is a liberal, but she is not a Democratic Party operative. She has liberal reflexes, but she thinks for herself. So, although I usually duck this particular dialogue, I chose to respond. I wrote:
“Darling–we BOTH oppose war.
But I was rather surprised by how you used the Kool-Aid “take-away” line that all Democrats have memorized as a way of shaming or silencing the opposition to this peculiar…arrangement.”
My liberal friend is not alone. If one views the debate about Obama’s arrangement with Iran that took place between Lauri Regan, Esq. and Barbara Slavin on New York 1, you will see how a professional Democrat projects an air of self-assurance and access to privileged, superior knowledge via sarcasm, smugness, disdain, and smiling, as they lie through their teeth. The style is meant to intimidate any and all opposition. Regan was not intimidated, she rebutted the lies and emerged victorious from the skirmish–but she was never allowed to present her own case.
I briefly wrote to my friend:
“YOU believe that this non-treaty “thingie” arrangement with Iran will avoid war now, or for a decade, or that it will avoid both conventional and nuclear war forever. I believe that this deal will inevitably lead to war, both conventional and nuclear. I also believe that lifting the sanctions will empower the Iranian mullahs to fund ever more global terrorism. Why would we trust Iranian leaders to distribute funding towards the needs of their people? They are the ones who sent hundreds of thousands of Iranian children to their deaths with the keys to Paradise around their necks–to clear land mined areas.
In my view, this is not a case of a Bad Deal vs War–it is a case of a Very Bad Deal, one which makes nuclear war even more inevitable.”
continue reading
www.breakingisraelnews.com/46353/talking-to-liberals-about-iran-is-a-perilous-art-form-opinion/?utm_source=Breaking+Israel+News&utm_campaign=d20ab2b406-BIN+Email&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b6d3627f72-d20ab2b406-86653405#ozguJAAOx77Wgxsg.97
By Dr. Phyllis Chesler August 5, 2015
A friend, a woman of refinement and sensitivity–a good liberal–unexpectedly just shocked me. We usually make it a point to steer clear of our known differences as the only way to enjoy what we have in common.
I had emailed twenty five photos of my recent trip to the Norwegian fjords accompanied by 800 words of text to a group of friends. In response to 69 (or 9 %) of these words, thiswoman wrote back:
“Your photographs are exquisite. And I am sure that in person these views were even more wondrous. We can’t wait to talk to you about the whole trip. I take it that you prefer that Iran continue building a nuclear bomb right now. I disagree.”
My friend is a liberal, but she is not a Democratic Party operative. She has liberal reflexes, but she thinks for herself. So, although I usually duck this particular dialogue, I chose to respond. I wrote:
“Darling–we BOTH oppose war.
But I was rather surprised by how you used the Kool-Aid “take-away” line that all Democrats have memorized as a way of shaming or silencing the opposition to this peculiar…arrangement.”
My liberal friend is not alone. If one views the debate about Obama’s arrangement with Iran that took place between Lauri Regan, Esq. and Barbara Slavin on New York 1, you will see how a professional Democrat projects an air of self-assurance and access to privileged, superior knowledge via sarcasm, smugness, disdain, and smiling, as they lie through their teeth. The style is meant to intimidate any and all opposition. Regan was not intimidated, she rebutted the lies and emerged victorious from the skirmish–but she was never allowed to present her own case.
I briefly wrote to my friend:
“YOU believe that this non-treaty “thingie” arrangement with Iran will avoid war now, or for a decade, or that it will avoid both conventional and nuclear war forever. I believe that this deal will inevitably lead to war, both conventional and nuclear. I also believe that lifting the sanctions will empower the Iranian mullahs to fund ever more global terrorism. Why would we trust Iranian leaders to distribute funding towards the needs of their people? They are the ones who sent hundreds of thousands of Iranian children to their deaths with the keys to Paradise around their necks–to clear land mined areas.
In my view, this is not a case of a Bad Deal vs War–it is a case of a Very Bad Deal, one which makes nuclear war even more inevitable.”
continue reading
www.breakingisraelnews.com/46353/talking-to-liberals-about-iran-is-a-perilous-art-form-opinion/?utm_source=Breaking+Israel+News&utm_campaign=d20ab2b406-BIN+Email&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b6d3627f72-d20ab2b406-86653405#ozguJAAOx77Wgxsg.97
!!
