Help Obama help Gaza

Hi everyone,

Please read the email below and consider donating money to provide balanced journalism on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, so that Obama can play a fair mediation role. If you can't donate, then please at least consider blogging about this.

The following email in italics is from Avaaz:

Dear Avaaz friends,

Obama can't turn the US into a fair mediator in the Middle East as long as US media remains heavily biased. Help fund experts to reach top US media editors with balanced perspectives for peace: Help Now

After over 1400 killed and 5000 wounded, the Gaza conflict enters a lull -- for now. But the awful violence will escalate again unless we take urgent action to address the root causes of the festering Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

One of the greatest hopes for peace is for the US under Obama to play an impartial mediation role. But the biggest obstacle to this is the strong bias of the US media. Only 4% of related US media stories even mention that Palestinians are under military occupation, and less than 25% of Americans say they can sympathize with both sides -- so even Obama will find it difficult to be fair.

We urgently need to meet this challenge as Obama makes historic choices on Israel-Palestine. The winds of change are blowing through American media -- the best way to seize this opportunity is to hire highly respected experts to sit down with powerful editors and journalists -- providing facts, information and opportunities to hear sensible voices for peace from both Palestinians and Israelis. Just $40,000 would be enough to hire a respected advocate to work part time for a year. Obama has promised "fairness" in his approach to this region, let's help make it politically possible for him to deliver:

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/gaza_media/

Far from taking sides, our effort will show that balanced journalism is both pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian, because it helps secure lasting security and justice for both peoples.

For years a balanced perspective has been largely absent from US media. Palestinian kids throwing rocks were seen as dangerous rioters, rather than token resistance to an illegal military occupation. The crushing nature of the that occupation, in which the smallest details of life are tightly controlled, is rarely covered by US media.(see links below) Until the American media can tell both heart-rending sides of the story, no US president will be able to broker a fair peace.

The opportunity is there. After the trauma of the Bush years there is a fresh wind blowing through American democracy and media. A new emphasis on responsible, tough journalism, and a genuine desire among media professionals to be more balanced. We can make real progress through getting experts to engage with journalists to help point the way. Click below to make it politically possible for Obama to take a strong and fair stand on the Middle East:

https://secure.avaaz.org/en/gaza_media/

With hope,

Ricken, Graziela, Alice, Luis, Paul, Brett, Milena, Paula, Pascal, Iain and the whole Avaaz team.

Sign the Pledge for better health care in US

Please read the following text in italics (from the Petition Site) below and consider signing this pledge for quality affordable health care for all Americans:

Americans spend more on health care than people do elsewhere, but somehow we spend more for less.

Most of us have no clue about the actual cost of our medical care until the bills arrive, because hospitals and doctors don’t publish their charges. The cost of insurance goes up and up, with fewer services covered. Millions of Americans needlessly suffer or die from preventable medical errors and infections.

It doesn’t have to be this way. Costs can come down and quality can improve if we stop letting the insurance companies run the show, make billing clear and simple, and focus on prevention and managing chronic illness better.

You can make a difference by taking our pledge and joining our effort to make health care a top priority for our nation’s leaders.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/411857645

THE PLEDGE:
I want to join with other Americans to support action, answers and accountability. It is time to:

• Give my family security that we will have quality care when we need it at a cost we can afford;
• Make hospitals and doctors more transparent about the cost and quality of care they offer;
• Elmininate unnecessary bureaucracy between patients and the care they need;
• End long waits for care;
• Examine all solutions that will ensure all Americans access to quality, affordable care, with input from real people like me.

  

Please donate to Amnesty International to help end torture

Hi all,

Please read the following text in italics from Amnesty International and consider donating to them to help Amnesty put an end to torture:

Today, we expect President Obama to announce a plan to close Guantánamo Bay prison. This is a major victory in restoring our values and rehabilitating America’s image worldwide. I want to personally thank you for being part of this fight with us.
we can restore America’s commitment to justice and take our place, once again, as a human rights leader around the world.

Make a tax-deductible donation to our 100 Days Campaign and help us seize this unprecedented opportunity to make human rights a centerpiece of the new Obama administration at this site:

https://takeaction.amnestyusa.org/site/c.jhKPIXPCIoE/b.4906793/k.B455/Watch_the_video_and_support_our_100_Days_campaign/apps/ka/sd/donorcustom.asp?msource=W91JDAY2&auid=4419046&kntaw25429=B44D542885184E76B3031E7AA6252DEE

In addition to closing Guantánamo Bay prison, in his first 100 days in office, we are calling on President Obama to end the use of torture and other inhuman treatment and fully investigate U.S. detention and interrogation policies, including holding accountable those responsible for torture.

Please watch this disturbing video clip from Taxi to the Dark Side. Then, make a donation of $35, $75 or $100 — whatever you can afford — to help us end the use of torture and restore America’s reputation around the world.

Amnesty members like you have always remained vigilant in the protection of human rights. I am counting on your continued leadership and commitment as we demand a full investigation into all aspects of U.S. detention and interrogation policies and usher in a new era of respect for human rights around the world.
Sincerely,

Larry Cox
Executive Director, Amnesty International

Sleight of mouth - Part 1

The following text in italics is an interesting article I found from wikipedia, which is about Sleight of Mouth. I'll post more on the use of Sleight of Mouth in Psychiatric settings, and my thoughts on this later:

Sleight of Mouth is a system of language patterns for persuasion. The concept was devised by Robert Dilts who modelled the argument and persuasion skills of Richard Bandler (the co-founder of Neuro-linguistic programming). By breaking down the methods, Dilts came up with 14 original patterns.^[1] Others, such as Steve and Connirae Andreas, have added even more patterns beyond these original 14.^[2]

As with other facets of the NLP system, the intention behind formalising the study of influence is to allow people to understand the process, and to duplicate those skills through the direct application of one or more of the Sleight Of Mouth patterns.

The name "Sleight of Mouth" builds off the phrase "Sleight of Hand" which refers to a magician's skills in making things happen which appear impossible.Ultimately, Sleight of Mouth focuses on influence by challenging, and thus changing, beliefs.

A brief description of the key patterns appears below. However, most of the understanding will follow from working through examples, and seeing how these are applied.

• Intent: Focus on the intention behind the statement. This can be done by highlighting their positive intent behind the belief, or by challenging the negative intent.
• Consequences: Find a consequence (even an unintended consequence) which results in the belief being challenged.
• Another Outcome: Maybe people who XYZ need ABC.
• Counterexample: Use an exception where their statement would not be true - which causes the belief that underlies the statement to be questioned.
• Apply to self: Turn the comment back to them - by saying (or implying) that the consequence they suggest applies to you, actually applies to them for making the original statement.
• Reality strategy: Challenge the belief based on the fact that beliefs arise from certain perceptions. Ultimately, this is about asking how they know their belief is true, or what aspects of the belief are really the issue. (This is like the Metamodel.)
• Model of the World: Argue that they are saying that as a metaphor for something else.
• Meta frame: Challenge the basis behind the belief, rather than the belief. Suggest that their belief presupposes something.
• Change Frame Size: Extend the implications of the belief to a larger (or a smaller) scale; or to a larger (or shorter) time frame.
• Hierarchy of Criteria: Challenge the belief based on more important criteria, suggesting something more important they should be considering.
• Chunk Down: Look at a specific element and challenge the belief.
• Chunk Up: Generalise in order to challenge the belief.
• Metaphor/Analogy: Use an example which challenges the belief.
• Redefine: Use similar words to say the same thing, ensuring that the implication is changed.^[1]
• Timeline: Challenge the belief on the basis of how long it holds true. A challenge may initiate: "That's true today, what about next year? Still true?" ^[3]
• Redirect: Attack the belief by questioning the underlying beneficial motives. Query "Yes, and what positive value leads you to believe that?" ^[4]

Sleight of mouth in psychiatric settings - Part 2

I've read an interesting article called "Sleight of Mouth patterns and Communication Patterns in Psychiatric Settings". You can read it here:

http://web.archive.org/web/20050802013551/http://www.23nlpeople.com/sleight_of_mouth_patterns.htm

The following text in italics is from the article. The normal blue text are my own comments on the article:

Now, let's look at the patterns from the reverse perspective. A patient who is asked to carry out a task X,Y or Z denies responsibility/capability by stating, "I haven't got a head." I have experienced a patient that maintained this line for several years. The standard response from the staff was a simpering effort of, "Well, that is just how you feel, why don't you go and sit down."

Because she was labeled as "ill", this statement was permitted as a statement of feeling and thus supported and inadvertently legitimized by the staff. Through experience, the staff had soon learned on arriving in the department that for themselves, this was the line of least resistance. Questioning this patient too closely could prove to be a very frustrating affair where invariably the patient would still get her own way.

Statement: "[I cannot do X,Y,Z because] I haven't got a head."

Pattern #2 - Consequence: "And what happens when you haven't got a head?"

Pattern #4 - Chunk Down: "So how can you talk without a head?" I think this is a good comment, as it clarifies and gently challenges what the client is saying
"
Pattern #6 - Counter-Example: "How is it that you are able to talk then?" This also gently challenges what the client is saying, which is appropriate.

Pattern #9 - Apply To Self: "So the head that you haven't got thinks that?"

Pattern #11 - Change Frame Size: "Oh right, so if we all used that excuse, nothing would ever get done." This sentence shouldn't be used, as it could aggravate clients. I've worked as a student social worker in a psychiatric hospital, and some clients could get physically or verbally abusive (and very distressed) if staff made rude comments like this. Many clients at the hospital I worked at were also less likely to obey instructions from staff who talked rudely like this. I've seen clients who refused to talk to staff who they thought were rude.

Pattern #12 - Meta-Frame: "You only say that because you like to confuse the staff about how you feel." How could Austin have known if the client is trying to confuse the staff? Not an appropriate question, IMHO. Plus it makes assumptions about the clients that may not be true. And plenty of psychiatric clients say bizarre things because of their mental illness, anyway!

Pattern #13 - Model of The World: "In my opinion, you are saying that as a metaphor for something else, are you not?" This question seems fine, except for the words "are you not". Using the words "are you not" assumes something that may not be true, and it is a leading question. Plus I've seen some psychiatric clients become easily offended (and refuse to talk/give vaguer answers) if someone uses leading questions (even when the leading questions are inoffensive).

Pattern #14 - Reality Strategy: "How do you know that not having a head stops you from doing X,Y,Z?" This is good, as it's a clarifying question (it gets the client to explain their views).

( Read more... )