This is a repost from an old Jakeneck post I wished to save from the dungeon of the Google cache, where it has been purged. Retreived from the Wayback Machine.
“I have a view that tackling these terrorist activities is on two levels. One level mainly is immediate; that is what the various governments, various countries are doing. There, I have no idea. Then on one level, the long term, terrorism is the worst kind of violence doesn’t come from the sky or from machines themselves, but from the heart. Hatred, ill feeling, a sense of revenge. That is the ultimate source of terrorism. So we have to address that ultimate source of terrorism. Like any other violence, violence doesn’t come automatically; violence comes from motivation. So therefore, I always try to promote non-violence on the level of motivation. Similarly, the countermeasure to terrorism ultimately must take serious consideration about change of human emotion, the human heart. Here, among various sorts of people, parents have a special important role to cultivate, in their child’s mind and heart, compassion. Then religious leaders, media people, all members of the human community, all have responsibility.” Dalai Lama – Washington DC, September 11, 2003 (emphasis mine)
A week later, on September 17, the Dalai Lama reiterated the above comments in another interview with the New York Times in his Manhattan hotel. But, the sentances quoted from the Manhattan interview are only half the story. From the New York Times: “I feel only history will tell,” he said. “Terrorism is the worst kind of violence, so we have to check it, we have to take countermeasures.”… But he emphasized that “the real antidote” to terrorism in the long run is “compassion, dialogue – peaceful means” – even with terrorists. “We have to deal with their motivation,” he said.” Terrorism comes out of hatred, and also short-sightedness.”
It all sounds rather like the message the Dalai Lama has been espousing for many years, right? It would be in line with his lifetime of disipline and his past and most recent statements on the matter. “Countermeasures” means, as the Dalai Lama explains in both interviews, non-violent measures.
There is a problem though. Laurie Goodstein’s article for the New York Times states that the Dalai Lama said ” it might be necessary to fight terrorists with violence”, when this was not the case at all, if one reads the quotes in her article carefully. It’s simply not there. The expository writing in the article by Goodstein makes the claim that violence is needed against terrorism. If the Dalai Lama said this, why not quote it? Was it off the record but she used it anyway? Rather doubtful one would think. Compounding the problem is the fact that it was picked up by wire services around the world which continued to invent further variations on the headline (“Violence needed to fight terror: Buddha’s man of peace”), all stating that the Dalai Lama has called for a violent response to terrorism. And, once again, he did no such thing as far as the available quotations cited in the article by Goodstein and the previous interview which discussed the same issues.
Here are some samples of the headlines and spin:
The New York Times: Dalai Lama Says Terror May Need a Violent Reply. :::: The International Herald-Tribune: Dalai Lama doesn’t rule out violence to fight terror. :::: News Max: Dalai Lama Talks Tough on Terrorism.
Even the ADL has been bitten by the spin insanity bug, stating in a newswire release: “The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) today commended the Dalai Lama for his important statement condemning terrorism and the need to take ‘countermeasures’, including force, to check this ‘worst kind of violence’.”
Including force? Anyone who can prove this was said by the Dalai Lama, I’ll take them out to a nice dinner. It’s deception, plain and simple. If not, then why not quote the Dalai Lama saying it directly? Because they can not. Because he did not say it directly. But, that does not stop the spin doctors apparently.
A few articles from the other side of the fence:
Reaction to the September 11 Washington DC speech from the Boston Globe: Dalai Lama holds to nonviolent quest.
From Reuters: Dalai Lama Says Terrorism Demands Response – Report . Please make note of how Reuters, although quoting from the New York Times article, wisely avoids defining “countermeasures” as violence, since the Dalai Lama’s own words in the interview make it clear what he actually meant.
But, far and away, the majority of headlines and articles actually state that the Dalai Lama said that violence was necessary or some variation thereof. Nothing new here. Spin insanity. And, you know what? People fall for it. Smart people too. This stuff is bad mojo brothers and sisters. It’s also greatly disconcerting that so many people actually believe it.
Not surprisingly, the Dalai Lama’s real message of love, peace, understanding, non-violence and responsibility was clear in Central Park today. (Waiting for text and video.)
