Commits

Shlomi Fish committed 51a0415

Convert the rest of the double quotes to stylised ones.

Comments (0)

Files changed (1)

English-Docbook/The-Enemy-English.db5.xml

   <para>After I started filling it, I said to him: “about the salary you gave me…”</para>
   <para>“Forget it!” the commander said and continued “during your service in the Organisation, you've done a great service to your people and your country. You've earned your pay, even if not honestly, and we thank you that you've joined our ranks at all in the first place. I just hope that during your civil life, you'll continue to maintain the spirit of the organisation and its philosophy.”</para>
   <para>“I'll do my best, sir.” I told him hastily while I signed it. Then I rose up and we shook hands. I thought a little about what the commander just said, and then recalled something and sat down. “Look, it may no longer be so relevant…”, I said to him “…but I’ve been a member of the Organisation for two years and nobody ever told me what the philosophy of the Organisation was. What is it, really?”</para>
-  <para>"Ah… the philosophy? I am surprised that it hadn’t been presented to you yet. In any case, I’d be happy to give you an answer, the ex-Member of the Organisation. Now, how should I start? Oh, I know. So here goes:</para>
+  <para>“Ah… the philosophy? I am surprised that it hadn’t been presented to you yet. In any case, I’d be happy to give you an answer, the ex-Member of the Organisation. Now, how should I start? Oh, I know. So here goes:</para>
   <para>The philosophy of the Organisation is very simple: our goal is to fight the Enemy with all our power. It is a holy war of our people against that criminal nation, and even though the well being of our people and its future are not at stake, it’s a war of the utmost importance. At least according to what we are told all the time or that we keep telling each other.</para>
   <para>We must sacrifice everything in order to achieve this purpose by our struggle with the Enemy, even the lives of the members of our people, which for their interest we are acting in the first place. And we have indeed done it successfully, and when I look back I realise one thing: we have been doing it and we are still doing it, despite all the difficulties. True – we had some difficult times. But they were nothing compared to the almost impossible times, which we usually have to operate in.</para>
   <para>However, since we began fighting the Enemy, we’ve noticed the existence of a major obstacle that hinders us. Actually it’s not a physical obstacle but a metaphysical and abstract term, and as such is supposed to be of no significance. Yet, the popularity of this term made dealing with it an inevitable fact. My friend, even if we had accepted a very mild interpretation of it, we would have found ourselves bounded by all sorts of invisible and impractical rules; we would have been in infinite conflicts and on top of all, the ambition of our soldiers to fight would have declined enormously. This term is ‘Morality’. </para>
   <para>Therefore, we have decided to accept the philosophical equation ‘Morality = no morality’.”</para>
-  <para>“Wait a second!”, I interrupted him, “are you referring to the assumption that the ends justify the means?”</para>
+  <para>“Wait a second!”, I interrupted him, “Are you referring to the assumption that the ends justify the means?”</para>
   <para>“Yes! Yes!”, said the commander excitedly. “To that precisely. In any case, accepting this equation places us in a dilemma. The reason for that is that it’s a complete contradiction of Aristotle’s famous treatise ‘Organum’ which states, among else, that: </para>
   <para>1. A is A.</para>
   <para>2. A is not not-A. </para>
   <para> And so I went to look for a job at the village’s grocery. I had to stand in line and when my turn cam the grocer said to me: “Good day to you! We don’t see you around here often since you joined the Organisation.”</para>
   <para>“Actually, I quit this very day. I was wondering if you have any job for me.”</para>
   <para>“Thanks to your wonderful organisation I don’t. Do you remember that, three weeks ago, the post next to the neighboring village tried to fire a missile at one of the Enemy’s posts but instead it hit this grocery store by accident? The missile ruined half of the ceiling and reaped a large hole in the west wall. The renovations here cost me a fortune, and although I could really use some help here, I really don’t have the money for a worker’s wage. Maybe some other time.”</para>
-  <para>"That does it!" I said to myself – I had to take action against such a crime against logic. "Sir, ", I said to him firmly, "I’ve heard some rather weak excuses for a weak financial status today that I decided to keep silent about, but I’m not ready to simply resume my daily agenda after such a poor excuse.</para>
+  <para>“That does it!”, I thought to myself. I had to take action against such a crime against logic. “Sir, ”, I said to him firmly, “I’ve heard some rather weak excuses for a weak financial status today that I decided to keep silent about, but I’m not ready to simply resume my daily agenda after such a poor excuse.</para>
   <para>If your business is in bad shape, try to find out what you didn’t do well and don’t blame someone else. This excuse is non-factual, not to the point, inconsistent and simply unconvincing. Even a bad politician would not have used an excuse like that.</para>
-  <para>Even if you had a job to offer me, I wouldn’t agree to work for you. Have a good day. Maybe I’ll come back in the evening, hear from you what happened to you today, and then I’ll be able give you another ten excuses why your financial state is bad recently. And believe me that all of them will be better than the one you gave me this instant!"</para>
+  <para>Even if you had a job to offer me, I wouldn’t agree to work for you. Have a good day. Maybe I’ll come back in the evening, hear from you what happened to you today, and then I’ll be able give you another ten excuses why your financial state is bad recently. And believe me that all of them will be better than the one you gave me this instant!”</para>
   <para>And so I left the place in anger. A complete lack of reason is always an irritating thing, not to mention that there was a personal insult involved in it too.</para>
   <para>After I exited I noticed that there are a senior mature officer and a group of soldiers from the Occupier’s army standing at the end of the street. It seemed to me like they were asking the residents of the village something, and then I saw that one farmer pointed straight at me in answer to their questions, and that they started walking towards me.</para>
   <para>The Enemy holds a small part of our country, which is close to its border, claiming that it needs it to protect his border settlements. The Occupier, on the other hand, holds half the nation directly, and in the other half rules a government that it assigned and supervises. Hence, the men of the Occupier’s army can do within my country as they please.</para>
   <para>“For instance, what caused its destruction and the murder of all the members of the Organisation that served in it. One of our investigators claims that all evidence point to the fact that they fought each other, yet we thought it was very inconceivable.”</para>
   <para>“Actually, it’s very conceivable. It was a constructive outcome of my efficiency-improving proposal.”, and I went on to tell him the rest of the story.</para>
   <para>“But it makes no sense.” cried the commander.</para>
-  <para>"Look," I replied "You must understand that for every logical claim you can think of there’s an opposite claim which is not logical. The conclusion is that half of the claims in the world are illogical. You should probably encounter them every day.</para>
-  <para>Let me give you an example: principally speaking, is it moral that another people, say the Enemy, will hold and tyrannize the country of another people, say the Occupier?"</para>
+  <para>“Look,” I replied “You must understand that for every logical claim you can think of there’s an opposite claim which is not logical. The conclusion is that half of the claims in the world are illogical. You should probably encounter them every day.</para>
+  <para>Let me give you an example: principally speaking, is it moral that another people, say the Enemy, will hold and tyrannize the country of another people, say the Occupier?”</para>
   <para>“Damn no!” said the commander firmly. “If they dared to do so…”</para>
   <para>“And yet you yourself are doing it to us, even though you don’t need to do it for a long time!”</para>
   <para>The younger soldiers started to laugh wildly until the commander turned his angry look towards them and they silenced. </para>
   <para>“Thank you.”</para>
   <para>And so they went away. It seemed to me like the soldiers continued to giggle or were at least smiling to themselves.</para>
   <para>I couldn’t find a job that day, but when I returned home that evening I was told that a I had received a telegram from the leaders of the Supporter, the country that finances the Organisation. I opened it and started reading it. The telegram read:</para>
-  <para>"</para>
+  <para></para>
   <para>Head of the Department of External Security</para>
   <para>Headquarters of the Supporter’s Military </para>
   <para>The Capital City</para>
   <para>The government of the Supporter will finance your travel, and you will be able to leave tomorrow morning. We would like to inform you of the following facts: we cannot assure your safety during this travel. Furthermore, despite your long service at the Organisation and your constructive proposal, we cannot say, wholeheartedly or halfheartedly, that we wish to protect your safety. Likewise, we cannot guarantee that we would not take actions that may harm you, indirectly or in a direct manner.</para>
   <para>We hope to see you here very soon.</para>
   <para>Head of the Department of External Security of the Supporter’s Military</para>
-  <para>"</para>
+  <para></para>
   <para>After I pondered it during the evening and discussed it with the members of my family, I finally decided that I do want to go there and meet with them. The next day, I traveled to the airport by car, and boarded an airplane that flew there. </para>
   </chapter>
   <chapter id="crying_wolf">
   <para>The flight lasted only two hours, and the airplane landed at an airport near the capital city of the Supporter. A car of the Supporter’s army waited for me there, and it drove me to the chief headquarters of the military. On the way, I had the chance to watch the view around the car.</para>
   <para>The Supporter Country belongs to the same part of the world as my country, but because they have an even greater talent of causing the other part of the world to hate them, I realized that the economical state of things I saw outside the car was even worse than that of my country. Poverty and hunger were seen almost everywhere.</para>
   <para>After a while, the car stopped in front of the headquarters’ building, and then they instructed me to exit the car. Two soldiers entered the building with me, and led me through several corridors until I arrived at a door that opened to a room. Inside the room was a long and large-size table, and around it sat senior officers as well as a number of men wearing civil clothes. At the head of the table sat a very senior officer with a stern and grave appearance. I assumed it was the head of the department of external security, who sent me the telegram. The soldiers sat me in a seat far from him, and then left the room and locked the door. It was probably a confidential meeting.</para>
-  <para>After a few seconds, the senior officer started to speak: "I’m glad you agreed to come here, the ex-Member, because at the moment, we find ourselves in a very grave situation because of you. For years, the Organisation has operated with an extraordinary efficiency and methodology. As a matter of fact, it was one of our most efficient weapons for venting our anger against the Enemy. But now, you, you alone, have cast a heavy shadow on its future. </para>
+  <para>After a few seconds, the senior officer started to speak: “I’m glad you agreed to come here, the ex-Member, because at the moment, we find ourselves in a very grave situation because of you. For years, the Organisation has operated with an extraordinary efficiency and methodology. As a matter of fact, it was one of our most efficient weapons for venting our anger against the Enemy. But now, you, you alone, have cast a heavy shadow on its future. </para>
   <para>I’m afraid that unless you find a way to work around your proposal, then the results will be catastrophic: not only for the Organisation but for all our other projects around the world, that are a model for harmfully and irrationally unloading bad feelings. Moreover, I’m afraid the proposal you suggested would have some consequences to out internal reign here!</para>
-  <para>So, the ex-Member, what do you have to say about it?"</para>
+  <para>So, the ex-Member, what do you have to say about it?</para>
   <para>“Look, ” I addressed him, “I take full responsibility over the proposal I gave you and its consequences. In my opinion, it is an excellent one, but since you, for some reason, don’t seem to also think so, I could help you find a way to bypass it. The first option is simply to accept Aristotle’s Organum.”</para>
   <para>“I’m afraid it is impossible. It contradicts our law-book.”</para>
   <para>“Can I take a look at your law-book?”</para>
   <para>“Yes. Do I have any reason to be nervous?”</para>
   <para>“Maybe. Did you have the chance to see one of the shows of this interviewer?”</para>
   <para>“No. Why?”</para>
-  <para>"She's just a tough interviewer and is very candid with her interviewees. If there is an embarrassing or a controversial issue in their background, she will not hesitate to ask questions about it. Many people don't feel comfortable with her.</para>
-  <para>Maybe you want to see a recording of one of the shows to prepare yourself?"</para>
+  <para>“She's just a tough interviewer and is very candid with her interviewees. If there is an embarrassing or a controversial issue in their background, she will not hesitate to ask questions about it. Many people don't feel comfortable with her.</para>
+  <para>Maybe you want to see a recording of one of the shows to prepare yourself?”</para>
   <para>“No, that's O.K. I love surprises. In fact, I noticed that I respond better after something unexpected happened than after something that I knew was already going to happen.”</para>
   <para>“As you wish. By the way, how much did you get for the interview? Really?!”</para>
   <para>After they finished dressing me and making me up, there was still some time left until the beginning of the show, and I spent it in the studios. I was offered to meet the interviewer before the interview, but preferred not to, as being spontaneous requires a little planning. Then the show started, yet I wasn't the first person to be interviewed there (rating considerations). The interviewer first interviewed two motion picture actors who came out with a new film, a psychologist who published his first book, and a physicist who recently publicised a finding that he discovered along with his colleagues. I was supposed to enter after the interview with the physicist was finished, the physicist being present at my interview.</para>
   <para>“So, ” the interviewer asked the physicist towards the end of the personal interview with him, “what would be the implications of the discovery on the industry?”</para>
-  <para>And he answered: "Well, the material is useful in many areas of the industry, but because until now its price was relatively high, companies used cheaper alternative materials instead of it. Our discovery, which lowers the price of its manufacturing, will allow factories to use it instead of the alternative materials and thus improve the quality of their products. </para>
-  <para>My labs are in progressive stages of writing the patent on the improved manufacturing process, and I hope my colleagues and I will receive a generous sum of money from the royalties on the patent."</para>
+  <para>And he answered: “Well, the material is useful in many areas of the industry, but because until now its price was relatively high, companies used cheaper alternative materials instead of it. Our discovery, which lowers the price of its manufacturing, will allow factories to use it instead of the alternative materials and thus improve the quality of their products. </para>
+  <para>My labs are in the advanced stages of writing the patent on the improved manufacturing process, and I hope my colleagues and I will receive a generous sum of money from the royalties on the patent.”</para>
   <para>“I hope it will be so, because you probably invested a lot of works in its development.”</para>
   <para>“Yes. Definitely.”</para>
-  <para>"That's all for now, Doctor. I ask you to stay here in the studio to receive our next guest, which many of the viewers waited to see the interview with him impatiently. This is a man who is frighteningly logical. A man, whose actions have implications on the whole world. A media hero, that a week ago no one knew who he was. Is he a hero for a moment, or has a new star been born in the skies of the world's politics?</para>
-  <para>Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the ex-Member of the Organisation!!"</para>
+  <para>“That's all for now, Doctor. I ask you to stay here in the studio to receive our next guest, which many of the viewers waited to see the interview with him impatiently. This is a man who is frighteningly logical. A man, whose actions have implications on the whole world. A media hero, that a week ago no one knew who he was. Is he a hero for a moment, or has a new star been born in the skies of the world's politics?</para>
+  <para>Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the ex-Member of the Organisation!!”</para>
   <para>This was my cue to come in, and so I entered the studio to the tempered claps of the audience that sat there. I advanced towards the interviewer, greeted the people who were present, and shook her hand and the hand of the physicist. Right after that, I sat down in the vacant chair next to the physicist. And then the interview began.</para>
   <para>The interviewer waited for the end of the hand-clapping, while moving her gaze from the audience in the studio to the physicist and me. After silence prevailed, she looked towards me and said: “The ex-Member, I must say we are very happy to have you here on our show. Tell me: how do you feel here, in the other part of the world?”</para>
   <para>“Excellent. The conditions are much more comfortable than what I'm usually used to.” I answered.</para>
   <para>“Very well. ” She said, “Please tell us a bit about your service in the Organisation? How did you feel back then?”</para>
-  <para>"Oh, it was definitely an illustrative service. However, there was one thing which bothered both me and my late comrades: they kept lecturing to us how bad the Enemy was and why we must fight it. I think half of our training time was wasted on such lectures. We knew the Enemy was bad, and that was the reason we joined the Organisation in the first place!</para>
-  <para>In my opinion, it was completely unnecessary. Perhaps they thought that without those brain-washes we would have reached the conclusion that there is no rationale behind the activity against the Enemy. Most of us reached that conclusion a few months, if not less, after we joined the Organisation and we still kept fighting. So they didn't have a reason to go to this length and just bother us."</para>
+  <para>“Oh, it was definitely an illustrative service. However, there was one thing which bothered both me and my late comrades: they kept lecturing to us how bad the Enemy was and why we must fight it. I think half of our training time was wasted on such lectures. We knew the Enemy was bad, and that was the reason we joined the Organisation in the first place!</para>
+  <para>In my opinion, it was completely unnecessary. Perhaps they thought that without those brain-washes we would have reached the conclusion that there is no rationale behind the activity against the Enemy. Most of us reached that conclusion a few months, if not less, after we joined the Organisation and we still kept fighting. So they didn't have a reason to go to this length and just bother us.”</para>
   <para>“Yet, you are content with your retirement from the Organisation and with your interesting suggestion for improving the efficiency of its actions?”</para>
   <para>“Of course.”</para>
   <para>“Tell me: do you, personally, hate the Enemy?”</para>
   <para>The Interviewer then said: “Speaking of the philosophy, according to many people who live here, in the other part of the world, both the philosophy and the actions of the Organisation are completely irrational.”</para>
   <para>I replied: “The Organisation thought that such a thing might happen, and therefore he printed his philosophy on a note.”</para>
   <para>The interviewer then responded: “I'm sorry, but I don't understand how it contributes to its validity. Everyone is able to write the world's biggest nonsense on a note, and yet it will remain illogical and subjective to whoever said it.”</para>
-  <para>"Yes, ", I said, "but this note was printed in eight milliard copies, and thus there's plenty of it for every man alive, which makes it objective for all practical reasons. You can receive it from the Organisation for free, by enclosing mail payment only. Likewise, you can find it on the Internet in the following address:</para>
-  <para>http://www.the-organisation.org/reference/anti-something/Aristotle/Organum/our_philosophy.html."</para>
+  <para>“Yes, ”, I said, “but this note was printed in eight milliard copies, and thus there's plenty of it for every man alive, which makes it objective for all practical reasons. You can receive it from the Organisation for free, by enclosing mail payment only. Likewise, you can find it on the Internet in the following address:</para>
+  <para>http://www.the-organisation.org/reference/anti-something/Aristotle/Organum/our_philosophy.html.”</para>
   <para>The interviewer seemed shocked for a moment. Some media experts would claim it was unprofessional, but in my opinion, it was pretty much in place. “Indeed a strong argument, and I'm sure many of the viewers would take your suggestion, and will check the philosophy of the Organisation themselves. Whether they will accept it - that it is a different question.”</para>
   <para>“Well, the objectivity of a certain thing is not dependent on people accepting it.”</para>
   <para>“Of course. Let me move on to the next question, which interests me and probably many other people very much. It is known that both the Enemy and the Occupier invaded your country, after actions of terrorist organisations such as the Organisation caused it to lose stability. Both countries had one share or another in its destruction. Today, the Occupier occupies a large part of your country directly, and controls most of the other part with a puppet government. The Enemy, on the other hand, occupies only a small part of your country which is close to its border, for security reasons, and the condition of the people who live there, is, as far as I know, not so bad. Why, if so, do the residents of your country act mostly against the Enemy and not against the Occupier?”</para>
-  <para>"An excellent question, Madame. There is, probably, some activity against the Occupier's army, but it is much limited and doesn't receive as much media coverage. Furthermore, it is a lot easier to fight the enemy, because the Organisation receives the support of the Supporter and the acceptance of the Occupier. Moreover, the Enemy's country, as opposed to the Occupier's country, is a free country, and therefore is committed to behave in a moral manner, even towards the members of the Organisation, that are, out of self-definition, immoral.</para>
+  <para>“An excellent question, Madame. There is, probably, some activity against the Occupier's army, but it is much limited and doesn't receive as much media coverage. Furthermore, it is a lot easier to fight the enemy, because the Organisation receives the support of the Supporter and the acceptance of the Occupier. Moreover, the Enemy's country, as opposed to the Occupier's country, is a free country, and therefore is committed to behave in a moral manner, even towards the members of the Organisation, that are, out of self-definition, immoral.</para>
   <para>If those reasons are not enough, then since the beginning of the Occupier's occupation, there have been peace in our country, which was disturbed only by the activity in the southern border. The civilians are happy that there's peace at last, and so they don't really mind that the country is under foreign occupation.</para>
-  <para>In my opinion, even if we had all the reasons to fight the Occupier, then like the man who looks under the light of a street-light for a coin he lost in the dark, we would have still preferred to fight the Enemy. It's much more convenient, and still satisfying."</para>
+  <para>In my opinion, even if we had all the reasons to fight the Occupier, then like the man who looks under the light of a street-light for a coin he lost in the dark, we would have still preferred to fight the Enemy. It's much more convenient, and still satisfying.”</para>
   <para>“From what I understood from what you said,” The physicist said “the war against the Enemy doesn't bring your country much good, and it would be better better if you did not fight it at all.”</para>
   <para>“Definitely Not!” I replied to him vigorously “The very fact that it would be better to fight the Occupier, doesn't mean that fighting the Enemy, even tough it isn't beneficial for us in the long run, or even the short run, is useless.”</para>
-  <para>"O.K., we could say you cleared that point." The interviewer said and continued, "Several forces in the Enemy's country suggest that the Enemy's army will retreat from the security-zone that he possesses at the moment in the south of your country, and will try to protect his civilians only from within his sovereign territory. This action might stop the fighting between him and the Organisation, because the Organisation reasons the continuation of the fighting in that it does it to liberate that territory. </para>
+  <para>“O.K., we could say you cleared that point.” The interviewer said and continued, “Several forces in the Enemy's country suggest that the Enemy's army will retreat from the security-zone that he possesses at the moment in the south of your country, and will try to protect his civilians only from within his sovereign territory. This action might stop the fighting between him and the Organisation, because the Organisation reasons the continuation of the fighting in that it does it to liberate that territory. </para>
   <para>Yet, the Supporter's country despises the Enemy, not because he hurt your people or holds part of your country, but out of ideological motives. Therefore, its interest is that the fighting against the Enemy will not be stopped at all. Moreover, even for the Occupier, the withdrawal from that territory will not change anything, and it will still want the fighting to go on.</para>
-  <para>Thus, assuming the Enemy withdrew from that limited territory he's controlling at the moment, do you think the Organisation would continue its activity against the Enemy?"</para>
-  <para>Undoubtedly, this was also a very good question. I thought about it a little and replied: "Look, it's not a small dilemma. On the one hand, it would be more difficult for them to get support for the actions from the civilians, unless they will manipulate the desire for revenge on the Enemy's past crimes. Still, both the Supporter and the Occupier, which now sanctions the aggressive activity of the Organisation, will want the Organisation to keep on fighting out of their own motives.</para>
-  <para>As you may well remember, I met with those who are responsible on the Organisation's activity in the Supporter's government and I concluded that except for the fact that they reject Aristotle's Organum, they are very reasonable people. Therefore, I am forecasting that in such a case, they will take the reasonable decision. For people who reject the Organum, of course."</para>
+  <para>Thus, assuming the Enemy withdrew from that limited territory he's controlling at the moment, do you think the Organisation would continue its activity against the Enemy?”</para>
+  <para>Undoubtedly, this was also a very good question. I thought about it a little and replied: “Look, it's not a small dilemma. On the one hand, it would be more difficult for them to get support for the actions from the civilians, unless they will manipulate the desire for revenge on the Enemy's past crimes. Still, both the Supporter and the Occupier, which now sanctions the aggressive activity of the Organisation, will want the Organisation to keep on fighting out of their own motives.</para>
+  <para>As you may well remember, I met with those who are responsible on the Organisation's activity in the Supporter's government and I concluded that except for the fact that they reject Aristotle's Organum, they are very reasonable people. Therefore, I am forecasting that in such a case, they will take the reasonable decision. For people who reject the Organum, of course.”</para>
   <para>“That is, will continue to fight the Enemy?”, the physicist asked.</para>
   <para>“Or vise versa. When the Organum is rejected, it's hard to know.”</para>
   <para>“I'd like to ask the ex-Member a question.”, the physicist said.</para>
   <para>“Please do.” The interviewer said to him.</para>
   <para>“Some of the actions of the Organisation were followed by bombardments of the air force of the Enemy's military, which were, at times, even very massive. Those bombardments sometimes caused civilians of your people to get hurt. The Organisation knew in advance that such bombardments could come as response to its activity, and yet didn't stop it. In your opinion, can one say that the Organisation is responsible in killing its own people?”</para>
-  <para>"No!" I replied to him, "It is absurd to believe that if someone performed an action with an expected cause, then he's guilty of the cause. Thus, for instance, as opposed to common belief, Hitler is not responsible for instigating World War II. All he wanted was for people to hear his command to invade Poland!</para>
-  <para>Furthermore, a man who positioned a gun at the forehead of another man and shot him, is not responsible for killing him. All he wanted was that the bullet will be emitted from the barrel, or even just for the trigger to be set backwards!"</para>
+  <para>“No!”, I replied to him, “It is absurd to believe that if someone performed an action with an expected cause, then he's guilty of the cause. Thus, for instance, as opposed to common belief, Hitler is not responsible for instigating World War II. All he wanted was for people to hear his command to invade Poland!</para>
+  <para>Furthermore, a man who positioned a gun at the forehead of another man and shot him, is not responsible for killing him. All he wanted was that the bullet will be emitted from the barrel, or even just for the trigger to be set backwards!”</para>
   <para>“Speaking about bombardments,” The interviewer said, “many criticisms were directed at the Enemy for hurting the civilians among you, although they are only trying to hurt the Organisation's soldiers. As someone who is now an objective viewer, do you think those criticisms are justified?”</para>
   <para>“What do you mean?” I asked, “I have always been completely objective.”</para>
   <para>“But you served in the Organisation!” The physicist burst, “The Organisation tries to hurt the soldiers or even the civilians of the Enemy, who are innocent. In my opinion, you were a criminal.”</para>
   <para>“That's not something that is derived from what I said either. Sometimes it just amazes me… ”</para>
   <para>But he did not stay to hear the rest of the sentence, but rose up and advanced towards the aisle. He probably identified me with confidence or assumed I'm the only man in the world who can answer in such a cryptic way. He hurried to the front of the hall where he spoke with some of the organisers of the study day. After they consulted between them quietly, one of them went on the stage and whispered something to the lecturer. The lecturer stopped lecturing, pondered for a moment and then said: “Gentlemen, I was informed right now that the ex-Member of the Organisation, that as we all know is visiting our country now, is at the moment present in this hall. Due to the important part he took in shaping the political status we are discussing today, I ask him to get on this stage and present us his opinion regarding the Organisation and the political state that prevails in the Country.”</para>
   <para>And so I rose and advanced toward the stage to the hand-clapping of the audience in the hall. After I went on the stage, the professor shook my hand, presented me with the microphone and went off the stage himself. I rose my hand to silence the hand-clapping, waited until they stopped and started to speak:</para>
-  <para>"Before I begin with my speech, I'd like to indicate that for the duration of the speech, I accept Aristotle's Organum. The reason for that is that otherwise I'll be able to prove any statement as well as its opposite statement. Therefore, since in this case all the possible statements are true, I could have finished the speech at this moment, since there's no use for me to prove them.</para>
+  <para>“Before I begin with my speech, I'd like to indicate that for the duration of the speech, I accept Aristotle's Organum. The reason for that is that otherwise I'll be able to prove any statement as well as its opposite statement. Therefore, since in this case all the possible statements are true, I could have finished the speech at this moment, since there's no use for me to prove them.</para>
   <para>As we all know, while the Occupier disabled the activity of all the other terrorist organisation that were active in my country for a long while, and the weaponry that they possessed was given to the army, the state of the Organisation had never been better. Why in that case does the Occupier gives him such a broad freedom of action? The reason for that is that the Organisation is not a national organisation in the full sense of the word or even in half its sense. In fact, it's an organisation that fulfils the philosophy of the Supporter, that strictly opposes the Enemy, but doesn't have an interest to struggle against the Occupier.</para>
   <para>If not for the desire of the Occupier to force the Enemy into a normalisation treaty, the Organisation wouldn't have survived in his current form either. Thus, out of being subordinate to an external political force, one can say that the Organisation is an alien corn in the political map of my country. But I, on my part, don't find any bad in the integration of foreign interests in local politics. Allow me to quote on the subject one of the most important people of our generation: 'Some say: 'Whatever you can do on your own, you can do best'. I disagree with them'.</para>
   <para>Because when you let others meddle in your own business, you slowly lose control on what you are doing and what happens to you. In a slow but methodical way, one loses track of his original intentions, one feels that one more and more doesn't understand why he's doing what he's doing… or for what or for whose sake you're doing it. And then he gets the feeling that nothing is under his responsibility, and that he is in fact a vassal of the external factor. And that is, from experience, the most liberating feeling in the world, which is accompanied by feeling a complete freedom from responsibility or from the need to decide the future on your own.</para>
   <para>The most practical and fast way to terminate the activity of the Organisation is, perhaps, to sign a normalisation treaty with the Occupier. However, the Occupier has its own conditions, that if the Enemy accepts them, its security in the northern border will decrease significantly. Since the power of the Occupier is ten times greater than the Organisation's, one can understand why your country does not rejoice to sign a normalisation treaty with it, while accepting all the conditions that are inferred from it.</para>
   <para>Indeed, it's very hard to deal with the Organisation, which is, in my personal opinion, one of the most interesting organisations of its kind in the current century, if not in the entire history. I don't think I have ever heard about an operational militant organisation that so realises the well-known sentence: 'Give me liberty or give me death'. The only shadow to my admiration, is that in their case they constantly prefer the second alternative.</para>
   <para>To sum up, it can be clearly seen that dealing with the Organisation, even though it doesn't endanger the very existence and proper functioning of the Enemy's country, is hard and problematic. This evil that is open from the north - no one knows when it will close.</para>
-  <para>Does anybody have any questions?"</para>
+  <para>Does anybody have any questions?</para>
   <para>I saw that some people from the audience raised their hands and I gave the permission to speak to a student that sat in front.</para>
   <para>“I just wanted to ask”, she addressed me, “who said all the sentences you quoted?”</para>
   <para>“Why, I said them!”</para>
   <para>“And isn't there something else you would like to tell about it?”</para>
   <para>“No, because I assume you have already seen the speech I gave during that seminar in the university.”</para>
   <para>And so the reception returned to its course, as I frequently answer people's questions regarding the trip I took abroad. “Why did you visit the Enemy's country at all?”, I was asked after a short while and I answered:</para>
-  <para>"Well, the main reason was that I wanted material for my book. However, I integrated into it the collection of valuable intelligence information about the Enemy, in a manner that is not considered as illegal by the authorities. Although I managed to get a lot of information without many disturbances, the results I came up with are not very satisfying.</para>
-  <para>As I made clear to myself, most of what I know now, was already known to us, or we assumed it was like that in the first place. In fact, if I wrote a report on the information I know about the Enemy, then 48 out of 51 pages, were already known to us before I took the trip."</para>
+  <para>“Well, the main reason was that I wanted material for my book. However, I integrated into it the collection of valuable intelligence information about the Enemy, in a manner that is not considered as illegal by the authorities. Although I managed to get a lot of information without many disturbances, the results I came up with are not very satisfying.</para>
+  <para>As I made clear to myself, most of what I know now, was already known to us, or we assumed it was like that in the first place. In fact, if I wrote a report on the information I know about the Enemy, then 48 out of 51 pages, were already known to us before I took the trip.”</para>
   <para>“And what about the three remaining pages?”</para>
   <para>“Oh, they contain a summary, conclusions and a bibliography.”</para>
   <para>Some time later, when I was involved in a conversation with my mother, my sister, a friend of mine from the village and two older neighbours, my mother burst and said:</para>
   <para>“Did I claim that?”</para>
   <para>“Yes.”</para>
   <para>“When?”</para>
-  <para>"Allow me to quote you:</para>
+  <para>Allow me to quote you:</para>
   <para>'A people that is deprived of its right is allowed to use any weapon whatsoever. We don't have a conscience and I hold any weapon I need… I will do anything that will simplify my politics. I am willing to guarantee the safety along all the borders and to sign agreements for non-invasion and to make treaties of friendship with every nation and nation. After all it would be naive to think, that you should not use such measures just because the future status may bring you to break these festive agreements.'</para>
-  <para>Well, don't you agree that you are saying here that the morality one should act upon is lack of morality?"</para>
+  <para>Well, don't you agree that you are saying here that the morality one should act upon is lack of morality?</para>
   <para>“No. This is indeed my quotation, but it does not mean that I think the Aryans should behave in an immoral way. You see, in this passage I meant that the members of the Aryan race can, or even should, take those actions in their struggle against members of lesser races, or against Aryan peoples who stand in the way of Nazism.”</para>
   <para>“So you mean a Nazi cannot kill another Nazi, but he is allowed to kill a Jew or a Negro, or even another Aryan who actively opposes the Nazism?”</para>
   <para>“Yes, you can interpret it that way, if you generalise it from the international politics to the private plane.”</para>
   <para>“Mr. Hitler, thanks to your response, your claim seems a lot more humane to me now! I take back saying that you claim that morality in fact equals to 'no morality'.”</para>
   <para>“I'm glad you think so.”</para>
-  <para>"Yes. Yes. It can be seen that all the time you acted out of that ideology, and not out of the simplistic ideology that I, by mistake, thought you held earlier. There's definitely much more reason behind your actions now that you've enlightened me.</para>
-  <para>Of course an outsider, who didn't have the chance to speak with you yet, could have reached the same conclusion I reached based on your actions. After all, Nazi Germany attacked and destroyed countries, that were mostly Aryan, and caused the killing of many, among them pure Aryans."</para>
-  <para>I noticed he was opening his mouth to say something, but I did not let him speak. "Yes, I know it was done because those countries acted out of Anti-Aryan interests. Or just because their conquest benefited the welfare of the whole Aryan race in the long term. I will also not discuss much detention camps, "purification" acts and other such organized actions in which a large number of members of Aryan peoples was killed. It's obvious that they can be justified by similar arguments.</para>
-  <para>But I'm interested in several hypothetical situations, that did not occur in real-life. I'd love to know how you would have acted in them."</para>
+  <para>“Yes. Yes. It can be seen that all the time you acted out of that ideology, and not out of the simplistic ideology that I, by mistake, thought you held earlier. There's definitely much more reason behind your actions now that you've enlightened me.</para>
+  <para>Of course an outsider, who didn't have the chance to speak with you yet, could have reached the same conclusion I reached based on your actions. After all, Nazi Germany attacked and destroyed countries, that were mostly Aryan, and caused the killing of many, among them pure Aryans.”</para>
+  <para>I noticed he was opening his mouth to say something, but I did not let him speak. “Yes, I know it was done because those countries acted out of Anti-Aryan interests. Or just because their conquest benefited the welfare of the whole Aryan race in the long term. I will also not discuss much detention camps, `purification´ acts and other such organized actions in which a large number of members of Aryan peoples was killed. It's obvious that they can be justified by similar arguments.</para>
+  <para>But I'm interested in several hypothetical situations, that did not occur in real-life. I'd love to know how you would have acted in them.”</para>
   <para>He seemed a little pleased with my speech: “I definitely agree to reply to you, so you'll witness the moral purity of the National-Socialistic ideology.”</para>
   <para>“I thank you.” Then I took out a notebook and a pencil from my pocket, and opened the notebook in its first page. “Let's start: What would you have done in case of an ideological attempt of a coup d'etat?”</para>
   <para>“What do you mean?”</para>
   <para>“And what is the nature of those activists: Socialists? Communists? Liberals? … ”</para>
   <para>“Let's say for simplicity that they are people of my intellect, only that as opposed to me they are sane.”</para>
   <para>“Okay. And what are their arguments against the Nazism?”</para>
-  <para>"Well, they claim that the Nazism was meant to enforce the dictatorship of a ruling and a corrupt group. This thing is done by manipulating common psychological weaknesses and destructive mental tendencies. This political and social doctrine is based on a basic mistrust in the ability of the individual to decide for himself, and a total belief in the ability of the leader to decide for the public. Likewise it opposes the freedoms of the individual but believe in an absolute manner that the leader, who is also the founder of the doctrine, is free to do as he pleases. The ideology of the Nazism is, in their claim, incredibly subjective, and is based on superstitions that lack any basis in reality.</para>
-  <para>They also have a criticism against you: they claim you are charismatic and manipulative but incompetent for any practical purpose, obsessive and with a chronic lack of self-esteem. Your racism proves, in their opinion, that you are infected by the disease that you are spreading, and the number of yells that you cried out of your free will a long time ago exceeded the boundary of good manners."</para>
+  <para>“Well, they claim that the Nazism was meant to enforce the dictatorship of a ruling and a corrupt group. This thing is done by manipulating common psychological weaknesses and destructive mental tendencies. This political and social doctrine is based on a basic mistrust in the ability of the individual to decide for himself, and a total belief in the ability of the leader to decide for the public. Likewise it opposes the freedoms of the individual but believe in an absolute manner that the leader, who is also the founder of the doctrine, is free to do as he pleases. The ideology of the Nazism is, in their claim, incredibly subjective, and is based on superstitions that lack any basis in reality.</para>
+  <para>They also have a criticism against you: they claim you are charismatic and manipulative but incompetent for any practical purpose, obsessive and with a chronic lack of self-esteem. Your racism proves, in their opinion, that you are infected by the disease that you are spreading, and the number of yells that you cried out of your free will a long time ago exceeded the boundary of good manners.”</para>
   <para>“Wait a second, and people agree with them?”, he said in a weak voice as he moved uncomfortably on his chair.</para>
   <para>For the first time in all the events which were depicted in this book, I did not respond, but kept silence and smiled a wide smile.</para>
   <para>“O.K. And you want me to tell you how I plan to react against them?” said the dictator.</para>
   <para>“Even better!”</para>
   <para>Apparently he did not.</para>
   <para>So I continued to present to hypothetical situations to him and to ask him what he would do if they happen. As time went by, he became more relaxed, responded with less emotion, and sat comfortably in his chair. It even seemed to me that he enjoys the whole deal. After a small hour I finished questioning him, and then I turned back the pages in my notebook, studied what I noted down for a while, and closed the notebook. I lifted my head and said to the dictator:</para>
-  <para>"Mr. Hitler, I must remark that besides your great contribution to modern philosophy, I am beginning to think you have an extraordinary gift for diplomacy. Despite all the things you've said, I am still convinced that your doctrine is not based on the assumption that morality equals 'no morality'. You definitely allowed for millions of Aryans to fight each other, whether in battles between armies, civil mutiny or even gang wars. You've come to dividing Germany and even the entire Aryan race to two camps, equal in their size and power, which were willing to fight each other until dusk. All that I've mentioned was done for the sole cause of you staying to rule over Germany.</para>
+  <para>“Mr. Hitler, I must remark that besides your great contribution to modern philosophy, I am beginning to think you have an extraordinary gift for diplomacy. Despite all the things you've said, I am still convinced that your doctrine is not based on the assumption that morality equals 'no morality'. You definitely allowed for millions of Aryans to fight each other, whether in battles between armies, civil mutiny or even gang wars. You've come to dividing Germany and even the entire Aryan race to two camps, equal in their size and power, which were willing to fight each other until dusk. All that I've mentioned was done for the sole cause of you staying to rule over Germany.</para>
   <para>But bloodshed was not the only act you defended with such a brilliant strategy. In the course of the investigation you reasoned how you would team together with Jews, Communists and/or Democrats in order to serve your interest; how you would agree to be the leader of a large group of clear anti-Nazis, in hope you'll be able to convert them to Nazism later. You even agreed to give speeches that boldly deny the Nazi theory in case it would have left you as a ruler.</para>
   <para>If another person would say all that, then most people would think he was the most selfish and power-hungry person they met. But because of your extraordinary diplomatic talent, I am still convinced you're doing it out of high morality, and for a noble cause! I don't have enough words to describe the deep impression I have from the way you said those things!</para>
-  <para>Do you have anything to say about it, Mr. Hitler?"</para>
+  <para>Do you have anything to say about it, Mr. Hitler?</para>
   <para>Oh! I wish you could see the look on his face! Actually, I would have also liked to see the look on his face, but just then I woke up from the dream. After I woke up, I sat on my two elbows and looked outside the window. It was before dawn, a few minutes before sunrise, so the sky were a little lit to the east. Many birds twittered intensively their morning twit - the coldness, probably, did not disturb them much. After I looked a little at the village houses, which most of the people in it were still asleep, I removed my elbows and lied down on bed.</para>
   <para>“Damn it!” I said to myself “I was just beginning to warm up…”</para>
   <para>-- End --</para>