Look for the way he is anchoring messages in his speeches to certain body movements. Listen how he uses hypnotic language patterns, or those high-level words that we can all agree to. The main differentiator to Bush is that he is using the language of suggestion - he invites people to listen to him.
Those that have made it through the Language and Behaviour Profile Training or our NLP Master Practitioner will realise that the language of suggestion is most suitable for those that are resistant to messages.
And, be honest, everybody is resistant to messages when we are confronted with them the first time. When we see someone the first time and this one person tries to convince us. How do we feel? Like we want to run away....
To further support my point - just remember the last time, someone approached you on the road or in the mall and wanted to strongly sell something to you. Argh - I believe you felt this churn in your stomach. It didn't make you feel good, did it?
The contrast is the language of invitation. Inviting people to listen to you. In NLP, we call this "Softening Frames". They are introductionary parts such as "I invite you to....", "May I suggest....", "Would you be able to consider..."
It is just another sentence, sure, but the sound is different. Try it out the next time you want to make a point or convince someone.
senten
Barack invites people to listen to him. This probably is the main difference to the Bush administration who demanded that others (involving the rest of the world) listen to them - think about the way Bush stated the "be for us or against us" points after September 11.
The article below indicates the importance of language in making a point.
Wayne Fields, a professor of English and American culture studies at Washington University in St. Louis is quoted as saying that "using language is one way to help effect that change."
Don't we all agree?
I am happy that I have chosen the language of influence as my job, as my hobby and my mission in life. Have you?
Read the article and share your thoughts!
"- The "War on Terror" is losing the war of words. The catchphrase burned into the American lexicon hours after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, is fading away, slowly if not deliberately being replaced by a new administration bent on repairing the U.S. image among Muslim nations.
Since taking office less than two weeks ago, President Barack Obama has talked broadly of the "enduring struggle against terrorism and extremism." Another time it was an "ongoing struggle."
He has pledged to "go after" extremists and "win this fight." There even was an oblique reference to a "twilight struggle" as the U.S. relentlessly pursues those who threaten the country.
But only once since his Jan. 20 inauguration has Obama publicly strung those three words together into the explosive phrase that coalesced the country during its most terrifying time and eventually came to define the Bush administration.
Speaking at the State Department on Jan. 22, Obama told his diplomatic corps, "We are confronted by extraordinary, complex and interconnected global challenges: war on terror, sectarian division and the spread of deadly technology. We did not ask for the burden that history has asked us to bear, but Americans will bear it. We must bear it."
During the past seven years, the "War Against Terror" or "War on Terror" came to represent everything the U.S. military was doing in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the broader effort against extremists elsewhere or those seen as aiding militants aimed at destroying the West.
Ultimately and perhaps inadvertently, however, the phrase "became associated in the minds of many people outside the Unites States and particularly in places where the countries are largely Islamic and Arab, as being anti-Islam and anti-Arab," said Anthony Cordesman, a national security analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank.
Now, he said, there is a sense that the U.S. should be talking more about specific extremist groups - ones that are recognized as militants in the Arab world and that are viewed as threats not just to America or the West, but also within the countries they operate.
The thinking has evolved, he said, to focus on avoiding the kind of rhetoric "which could imply that this was a struggle against a religion or a culture."
Obama has made it clear in his first days in office that he is courting the Muslim community and making what is at least a symbolic shift away from the previous administration's often more combative tone.
He chose an Arab network for his first televised interview, declaring that "Americans are not your enemy." Before his first full week in office ended, he named former Sen. George J. Mitchell as his special envoy for the Middle East and sent him to the region for talks with leaders.
According to the White House, Obama is intent on repairing America's image in the eyes of the Islamic world and addressing issues such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, unrest in Pakistan and India, Arab-Israeli peace talks and tensions with Iran.
Using language is one way to help effect that change, said Wayne Fields, professor of English and American culture studies at Washington University in St. Louis.
"One of the contrasts between the two administrations is the care with which Obama uses language. He thinks about the subtle implications," said Fields, an expert on presidential rhetoric. The Bush administration "didn't set out deliberately to do things that were offensive but they liked to do things that showed how strong they were, and to use language almost in an aggressive sense."
Obama, he said, understands that language and conversation must be worked at and that it's "not just a series of sound bites."
White House officials say there has been no deliberate ban on the war-on-terror phrase. And it hasn't completely disappeared. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs has used the wording in briefings, and it's still in vogue among some in the Pentagon and State Department.
Asked about Obama's avoidance of the phrase, Gibbs said the president's language is "consistent with what he said in his inaugural address on the 20th. I'm not aware of any larger charges than that."
Juan Zarate, who served as the deputy national security adviser for combating terrorism during the Bush administration, said he has seen signs that the new White House is trying to subtly retool the words, if not the war.
"There's no question that they're looking very carefully at all issues related to how the war on terror is packaged, to include lexicon," said Zarate. "All of this is part of an attempt to see how they could at least frame a change in policy even if, at the end of the day, the actual war on terrorism doesn't change all that much."
Source
"PUBLIC PROGRAMMES: ASIA MIND DYNAMICS ORGANISES NEW COURSES FOR THOSE INTERESTED TO BECOME NLP PRACTITIONERS, NLP COACHES, HYPNOTISTS OR THOSE THAT WANT TO SIMPLY IMPROVE THEIR INFLUENCE AND COMMUNICATION SKILLS
For more information, follow these links:
To learn Certified NLP Practitioner and Certified Timeline TherapyTM Techniques Training, click here.
To learn more about our Advanced Coaching Programme, click here
To learn more about the Language and Behaviour Profile (LAB Profile) - Words That Change Minds Certification, click here
To register for any of these courses, click here.
To learn more about Asia Mind Dynamics, click here
For companies, interested to know more about in-houses courses, click here.
Alternatively, send an email to andreas.dorn AT gmail.com or najwadorn AT yahoo.com or call 012-287 5048 (Andreas) or Najwa (012-3276 048) for a discussion about your needs and requirements.
See you soon!
Labels: francesca was marriage next woman strong stress disorder solution lockyer was marriage francesca was how world romita genre wished marriage designate desire friendship
0 comments:
Post a Comment