Hi Bob,

Thanks for your reply.... Hope we can dialogue some more now, as you
read my replies below:

On Friday, September 21, 2001, at 09:39 AM, Bob wrote:

> Hi Amanda et al ......
>
> I was touched by your sentiments but felt at variance to several of your
> following comments.
>
> We all have the capacity to damage ourselves and others. We work with
> couples who once loved each other and now in the parting, act out their
> fear
> and hurt by demonstrating hatred and damage towards each other and those
> caught up in the split - blaming the other to justify actions.
> They are contactful human beings who we work with but they are caught
> up in
> a painful cycle.Their actions are seen as irrational and so are
> referred to
> by the other side as `mad`. This makes us right and them wrong and
> suggests no path forward.
>
I think what I was hoping to say, was that it was the non acceptance of
each other as different, whether we adhere to the faith of Islam, or any
of the other numerous faiths throughout the world, that causes the
irrational (because it is irrational), viewpoint that because someone
believes in a (different God), then they are a threat.  What I would
like to say, is that this seems to be a projection of the individual's
lack of acceptance within themselves.  Add this up collectively, and you
get a group of people who feed on each others intolerance.  If this is
then aimed at others, those others, presumably will get on the defensive
and into their own (equally irrational) belief that they are in the
right.  A viscious cycle begins.  To this pot of irrational beliefs and
feelings, a religious element, and you have the makings of  a "holy
war".  Catholics agains Protestants (in Ireland).  Muslim against
Hindu,  White against Black, East against West.  etc.  and so it goes on.

> Both sides in the American terror claim God to be on their side and
> describe
> the other in negative dismissive terms. Massive demonstrations take
> place in
> Pakistan and elsewhere against America, burning the American flag.
> America
> uses the terms terrorist and fanatic and Bin Laden is no longer a human
> being to be engaged
> with. Bush, who was widely disliked as a leader yesterday is now
> leading the
> charge from our end with a `God Bless America`.
>
> I have just returned from a Swedish conference of therapists from 32
> countries and we couldn't agree on the text of a telegram to be sent as
> the
> views were too wide ranging. People's sense of who was a `terrorist` or
> `fanatic` varied a lot. Terrorist undermining society to be locked away
> one
> day, world leader the next (Nelson Mandela etc etc)
> Reading the world's press in Sweden was also very illuminating as the
> same
> experiences get described in such different ways and yet it is always
> described as though it is `the truth`.

Truth though is subjective, it depends what our inner belief system is,
and where we are coming from in terms of our individual beliefs.  This
seems to be why there are so many people who believe that they are right
and everyone else is wrong.  In spiritual terms, I guess there is no
right and no wrong.  In terms of individual beliefs, we are all right.
The problems comes when no one realises that we all come from this
individual subjective reality.

Why else is Osama Bin Laden so convinced and convincing to others, of
America being "wrong".

The difficulty lies in the fact that People with a cause, who are
collectively supported by others with similar beliefs, can find
themselves swept along in a tide of killing and destruction, often of
innocent people (adults and children).  For me, this carries it too far,
because it ENFORCES their actions and the awful consequences onto others.
>
> If my family's lives were in serious danger I would go to extremes to
> protect them, including I imagine killing who I saw as the attacker.
> Expressing the pain and anger and setting up very robust boundaries for
> safety feels important.

There is certainly a need to have firm boundaries, and when absolutely
necessary to be able to be strong enough to hold off the intrusion of
others who disregard and disrespect our boundaries.  To if necessary
defend and to do whatever it takes, to make that stand.  To do this is a
survival instinct, and our need to protect that which we hold dear to
us; those we love, and what we have worked hard to build, is a basic
need.  And lets face it,  when terror is upon us, our basic survival
instinct, to protect and defend, is automatic.

But I feel there is more going on than at first meets the eye.  There
are a number of complex, yet fundamental issues, that the world society
are facing, collectively, just as individually, people have personal
issues to deal with.  Society needs to heal the past, to heal the pain,
to accept and learn to understand what the terrorist is really saying..
For me, I have to ask, is the terrorist symbolising something in our
world society, that we need to understand, so that the shadow of it, can
be healed and no longer has to go under ground and to undermine world
peace, with intolerance, slaughter, death and terror?

What do you think?

> However I think the desire to dismiss the other side
> is too easy (pain relief) and blocks out the real situation and
> opportunities that may be available for contact and movement. This of
> course
> requires some humility on both sides and I have seen litle from either
> so
> far.

Absolutely.  I don't think I was suggesting a dismissal of ' the other
side '.  I feel it is of absolute importance for the world
(collectively), to at last look deeper within the events of recent weeks
(years of terrorism like an inner sabatuer), and to ask the difficult
questions of all the worlds diverse societies;  to root out the
underlying causes of non acceptance, judgement of  others, attack and
defense of each others beliefs.  Where are we as a world society, not
being congruent? where are we being non accepting, non trusting? without
true faith that each of us is a unique expression of evolving spirit,
within a collective human experience; At last seeing, understanding that
our difference is okay and not a threat.  To finally understand as human
beings, that there is enough for everyone.  Enough belief and enough God
(to use one of the words to describe this thing, this being, that we all
need so much to believe in - except of course those that don't believe).

>
> So I appreciated your input but ....
> when you say God bless us all, with whose God?

I meant to be inclusive of every living being on the planet, and that I
wish with my heart, the unconditional physical, emotional, spiritual
organ, that whatever human beings all over the planet believe in,
whether they choose to hang their belief on the coat hanger of Islam,
Catholicism, Buddha, Christ, Allah, Father Mother God, The Earth Mother,
Father Sky, Great White Spirit or any others that I don't know about,
may they be blessed.  I think most religions will say that there is only
one God really, but because we are a diversity of individuals, we chose
to create different ways of expressing our beliefs.  After all, doesn't
it say in the Bible somewhere, that Jesus said "In my Fathers house,
there are many mansions". . I take this to mean that whatever way we
choose, we all end up in Gods house eventually.  There are many paths,
to the same destination.

If there was ever a time when humanity needed to be blessed, it's now
don't you think?

> yours controversially
> Bob Smith
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Amanda Poyner <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2001 7:20 PM
> Subject: American Situation/updated
>

Best Wishes Bob
Amanda