HAPPY NEW YEAR to all our family and friends.
Our wish for this coming year is that the Muslim world learns the Biblical lesson that to save a single life is to save the whole world.
When the Arabs decide to equate the value of life as they see it with the value of life as the Jews see it, the conflict between the two worlds will end. The opposite world view and actions emanating from those opposing beliefs have caused such catastrophic harm to the Muslim populations of their warring nations that it is hard to reconcile Muslim leadership with the meaning of the word, "leadership."
The bigotry and intolerance of the Islamic religion will remain a bloody blot on the Imams, the "Judges," of the Arab world. Their calls and "Fatwas" for death for writers and cartoonists, for Jews and Americans, for believers in other religions and non-believers in Islam, masks a bubbling cauldron of hatred that inflames the Arab world to mass suicide. And like lemmings, the uneducated primitive believers in a faith devoid of ethics and ethical behavior, plunges head-first over the cliffs surrounding them into an acidic abyss of raging ignorance.
Appealing to the meanest level of behavior in the world of Islam and in all the most primitive societies, one may observe the beheading, the obscene rape of defenseless women, the tearing limb from limb of living children, and the explosive carnage of Islamic savages claiming their right to enter holy heaven and its virgins in exchange for their excruciating acts of "honor" and "belief."
Where will their "leaders" lead them? How will this end?
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
Monday, December 29, 2008
TARGET OF VIOLENCE
So long as Israel is a target of violence as it has been since its founding in 1948, Israel must alone determine its defensive posture.
The ruling government of Gaza, Hamas, an Islaamist fundamentalist terror group, has been lobbing deadly rockets on to Israeli soil since it took over the "Gaza Strip" in June of 2007. It has allowed Islaamic Jihad and other Islaamist terror groups to fire rockets at will across the border aimed at civilian populations. It has captured an Israeli soldier and it has allowed and enabled snipers to shoot over the border at Israeli targets. Hamas has ammassed war materielle smuggled from Egypt through tunnels dug under their common border. Hamas is in total control of the Gaza Strip and its population. It is beloved by the Arab population and is almost totally supported in it's aim to destroy Israel.
To the chagrin of many in the Islaamic world, Hamas entered a truce agreement with Israel a little over six months ago. Although rockets continued to rain down on Israel, Hamas itself ceased these deadly acts. Then, after a clear decision not renew that truce and a tremendous increase in deadly fire, Israel, acting in self-defense, began bombing Hamas targets on December 27, 2008.
The Arab world and their anti-Israel allies began to cry.
Zionism was founded in the late 1800’s as an ideology with a material goal, the establishment of a homeland for the Jewish people. Though questions arose over many years about the place of that home, there was never a question about the establishment of a geographical entity, a nation by definition that Jews from any place in the world could live without question and without restrictions.
The biblical land of the Jews that became the State of Israel in 1948 was in a territory modernly called Palestine. The land was predominantly occupied by Arabs. Jews, most of whom were religious, lived there from biblical times in ancient towns and cities.
World Jewry contributed money over the decades from the beginning of the Zionist Organization to purchase land and to establish towns and cities and settlements of various kinds to create that homeland for Jews who came to live there as pioneers or religionists. Zionism called for Jews in the Diaspora to come to Israel to live or to support the establishment of the state through prayer, money, political activity in their home countries, by sending their children to learn or live in Israel, and by any means that could be found, be themselves part of that movement to establish the homeland for the Jewish people in the land of Israel that became the State of Israel.
Religious, ethnic, and territorial conflicts arose almost immediately after the Zionist Organization and other Jewish Zionist movements influenced Jews to settle in Palestine. Although Jews lived there for many centuries, even millennia, they were caluminified as intruders if they came as Zionists rather than Jewish religionists. Arabs attacked Jewish agricultural settlements and murdered Jewish settlers and travelers throughout Palestine. Riots against Jewish landholders broke out and more Jews were killed by Arabs in the hope and belief that such attacks would prevent more Jews from coming to Palestine.
After World War I and the League of Nations approval of the Balfour Declaration that stated that the Jewish People had the right to establish a homeland in Palestine and up through May of 1948, after the United Nations voted to approve the Partition Plan that allocated portions of Palestine to the Jews and the Arabs, Jewish settlements were under intermittent small scale attacks by Palestinian Arabs. When the British government withdrew its army after more than two decades of occupation of the “Palestine Mandate,” the Jewish population declared the establishment of the State of Israel. Within days, five Arab armies attacked the new nation. After a year of warfare, a truce agreement was signed. Israel survived. Since then, Israel has fought five wars with its Arab neighbors. Egypt and Jordan have signed peace treaties with Israel.
Jews living in the countries of the Arab world left their homes under threat of violence after the 1948 war. Palestinian Arabs fled from their homes during that war out of fear of violence and at the exhortations of the invading Arab countries to remove themselves from the lines of fire and with the promise of acquiring the homes and lands of the Jews who would be thrown into the sea by the invading Arab armies. The fates of the two groups of refugees are markedly different. A substantial number of Jews fled to Israel which worked to absorb them. Others fled to countries around the world that allowed them to immigrate. The vast majority of Palestinian refugees remained refugees in camps in the surrounding Arab countries.
Israel remains a target of Arab violence to this day.
The ruling government of Gaza, Hamas, an Islaamist fundamentalist terror group, has been lobbing deadly rockets on to Israeli soil since it took over the "Gaza Strip" in June of 2007. It has allowed Islaamic Jihad and other Islaamist terror groups to fire rockets at will across the border aimed at civilian populations. It has captured an Israeli soldier and it has allowed and enabled snipers to shoot over the border at Israeli targets. Hamas has ammassed war materielle smuggled from Egypt through tunnels dug under their common border. Hamas is in total control of the Gaza Strip and its population. It is beloved by the Arab population and is almost totally supported in it's aim to destroy Israel.
To the chagrin of many in the Islaamic world, Hamas entered a truce agreement with Israel a little over six months ago. Although rockets continued to rain down on Israel, Hamas itself ceased these deadly acts. Then, after a clear decision not renew that truce and a tremendous increase in deadly fire, Israel, acting in self-defense, began bombing Hamas targets on December 27, 2008.
The Arab world and their anti-Israel allies began to cry.
Zionism was founded in the late 1800’s as an ideology with a material goal, the establishment of a homeland for the Jewish people. Though questions arose over many years about the place of that home, there was never a question about the establishment of a geographical entity, a nation by definition that Jews from any place in the world could live without question and without restrictions.
The biblical land of the Jews that became the State of Israel in 1948 was in a territory modernly called Palestine. The land was predominantly occupied by Arabs. Jews, most of whom were religious, lived there from biblical times in ancient towns and cities.
World Jewry contributed money over the decades from the beginning of the Zionist Organization to purchase land and to establish towns and cities and settlements of various kinds to create that homeland for Jews who came to live there as pioneers or religionists. Zionism called for Jews in the Diaspora to come to Israel to live or to support the establishment of the state through prayer, money, political activity in their home countries, by sending their children to learn or live in Israel, and by any means that could be found, be themselves part of that movement to establish the homeland for the Jewish people in the land of Israel that became the State of Israel.
Religious, ethnic, and territorial conflicts arose almost immediately after the Zionist Organization and other Jewish Zionist movements influenced Jews to settle in Palestine. Although Jews lived there for many centuries, even millennia, they were caluminified as intruders if they came as Zionists rather than Jewish religionists. Arabs attacked Jewish agricultural settlements and murdered Jewish settlers and travelers throughout Palestine. Riots against Jewish landholders broke out and more Jews were killed by Arabs in the hope and belief that such attacks would prevent more Jews from coming to Palestine.
After World War I and the League of Nations approval of the Balfour Declaration that stated that the Jewish People had the right to establish a homeland in Palestine and up through May of 1948, after the United Nations voted to approve the Partition Plan that allocated portions of Palestine to the Jews and the Arabs, Jewish settlements were under intermittent small scale attacks by Palestinian Arabs. When the British government withdrew its army after more than two decades of occupation of the “Palestine Mandate,” the Jewish population declared the establishment of the State of Israel. Within days, five Arab armies attacked the new nation. After a year of warfare, a truce agreement was signed. Israel survived. Since then, Israel has fought five wars with its Arab neighbors. Egypt and Jordan have signed peace treaties with Israel.
Jews living in the countries of the Arab world left their homes under threat of violence after the 1948 war. Palestinian Arabs fled from their homes during that war out of fear of violence and at the exhortations of the invading Arab countries to remove themselves from the lines of fire and with the promise of acquiring the homes and lands of the Jews who would be thrown into the sea by the invading Arab armies. The fates of the two groups of refugees are markedly different. A substantial number of Jews fled to Israel which worked to absorb them. Others fled to countries around the world that allowed them to immigrate. The vast majority of Palestinian refugees remained refugees in camps in the surrounding Arab countries.
Israel remains a target of Arab violence to this day.
Saturday, December 27, 2008
ZIONISM - A MISTAKE?
It is my belief is that Zionism, the ideology that brought the establishment of a Jewish homeland, a Jewish State, is a plus rather than a minus for the Jews and the world. However much peace between Israel and the Arab world has eluded fruition and whoever bears what weight of guilt for this lack of peace, the creation of a modern state for the Jewish people was and is a positive step for humanity. I believe this to be so despite the iniquities of Israel and the Jews toward the indigenous Arab population of what was the territory of Palestine.
The lot of the Palestinian Arabs over the past sixty years since the State of Israel came into being, could have been and should have been very different, independent of what the Jews did and are doing to them. Even today, their horrible existence could be turned around completely regardless of the history between the two Peoples. To search for the solution to their existential problems in the removal of the Zionist enterprise is a sad trap into which they and their mentors have fallen.
For those Jews who believe that peace lies in the removal of Israel or in the reduction of the defense capability of Israel in the face of the reality of Arab aggression and the clearly stated goal of wiping out Israel and the Jewish People by Muslim nations and their allies, the sad picture of Jewish history must be shown again and again.
Asking Israel to act peacefully and humanely in the face of that continued aggression and blaming Israel for that continued aggression is simply naive. We personally would not act that way in the face of continued attacks on our children. Why should we ask the nation to act that way?
The Palestinians and their brethren bear collective responsibility for this state of affairs certainly no less than Israel and its supporters. The simple truth is, based on the actions of both sides over the years since the Zionist movement came into being, that the first blood shed was always the blood of Jews.
Finally, through the millennia of history, war has changed the face of geography and the fate of nations. It will continue to do so. The Balfour Declaration went away. Our "bi-national state" went away. The Partition Plan of the United Nations went away. Only the detritus of war has remained. The return of Jews to Israel could have and should have brought an elevation in the lives of Palestinian and Israeli Arabs. The movement was a peaceful one. Yet it could not succeed without wars brought to it by Muslim nations. It is not Israel's choice to find peace in the grave if the Jewish People is to continue to exist.
The lot of the Palestinian Arabs over the past sixty years since the State of Israel came into being, could have been and should have been very different, independent of what the Jews did and are doing to them. Even today, their horrible existence could be turned around completely regardless of the history between the two Peoples. To search for the solution to their existential problems in the removal of the Zionist enterprise is a sad trap into which they and their mentors have fallen.
For those Jews who believe that peace lies in the removal of Israel or in the reduction of the defense capability of Israel in the face of the reality of Arab aggression and the clearly stated goal of wiping out Israel and the Jewish People by Muslim nations and their allies, the sad picture of Jewish history must be shown again and again.
Asking Israel to act peacefully and humanely in the face of that continued aggression and blaming Israel for that continued aggression is simply naive. We personally would not act that way in the face of continued attacks on our children. Why should we ask the nation to act that way?
The Palestinians and their brethren bear collective responsibility for this state of affairs certainly no less than Israel and its supporters. The simple truth is, based on the actions of both sides over the years since the Zionist movement came into being, that the first blood shed was always the blood of Jews.
Finally, through the millennia of history, war has changed the face of geography and the fate of nations. It will continue to do so. The Balfour Declaration went away. Our "bi-national state" went away. The Partition Plan of the United Nations went away. Only the detritus of war has remained. The return of Jews to Israel could have and should have brought an elevation in the lives of Palestinian and Israeli Arabs. The movement was a peaceful one. Yet it could not succeed without wars brought to it by Muslim nations. It is not Israel's choice to find peace in the grave if the Jewish People is to continue to exist.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
CAN ISRAEL AS ISRAEL SURVIVE?
The State of Israel established on May 15, 1948 as a homeland for the Jewish People, has faced decades of attempts to destroy it by the surrounding Arab states as well as its rejection by a variety of Jewish entities within the state, religious, communist, and peacenik, intent on demoting it from that high defensive posture for the Jews alone and reconfiguring it into a Middle East State for Jews, Arabs, and anyone else seeking citizenship of a country resembling in miniature the admixture of peoples in the United States of America. The variety of people from nations, religions, ethnicities and cultures, plus Native Americans, blended to form the nation of the United States without dominance by a single ethnic or religious entity, is an achievement worthy of emulation by ALL nations of the earth.
However, in the United States, apart from threats by some Nazi loonies, no ethnic group has been threatened with annihilation as have the Jewish People and the Jews in Israel. In response to the eons of world-wide anti-Semitic persecution and the more recent Nazi holocaust, Israel’s founders vowed to establish a safe-land for the Jewish People in its ancient biblical geographic homeland. FROM THE VERY FIRST DAY OF ISRAEL’S CREATION IN 1948, THE JEWS AND THEIR STATE HAVE BEEN THREATENED WITH ANNIHILATION BY THEIR ARAB NEIGHBORS. THAT THREAT CONTINUES TO THIS VERY DAY!
A substantial number of Jewish peace groups have called on Israel to mend its ways in treating its Arab citizens and Arab refugees from the wars inflicted on it by the surrounding Arab states. Israel has been called on, as a gesture of peace, to return captured lands from those wars to enable the Arabs to establish a Palestinian State in the surrounding territories. Israel has not acquiesced to that demand absent clear disarmament measures. The peace groups, the United Nations (in which fifty-four Moslem states automatically vote against Israel on every issue,) Amnesty International that calls for Israel to lay down its arms and be nicer to the Arab war refugees than their Arab brethren, the surrounding oligarchic Arab nations, and a variety of other large nations with huge monetary motivations, have all called on Israel to make peace with the surrounding Arab nations, that, together with Iran, keep shooting at Israel and are all intent on wiping it off the face of the earth.
Are they all nuts?
When the Moslem world stops shooting and declares that Israel is a fellow state in the Middle East and that they will defend its right to exist against all comers and they will assist Israel to defend that right against any and all attackers, Israel will then sit down at the peace table to realistic negotiations that can lead to peace.
However, in the United States, apart from threats by some Nazi loonies, no ethnic group has been threatened with annihilation as have the Jewish People and the Jews in Israel. In response to the eons of world-wide anti-Semitic persecution and the more recent Nazi holocaust, Israel’s founders vowed to establish a safe-land for the Jewish People in its ancient biblical geographic homeland. FROM THE VERY FIRST DAY OF ISRAEL’S CREATION IN 1948, THE JEWS AND THEIR STATE HAVE BEEN THREATENED WITH ANNIHILATION BY THEIR ARAB NEIGHBORS. THAT THREAT CONTINUES TO THIS VERY DAY!
A substantial number of Jewish peace groups have called on Israel to mend its ways in treating its Arab citizens and Arab refugees from the wars inflicted on it by the surrounding Arab states. Israel has been called on, as a gesture of peace, to return captured lands from those wars to enable the Arabs to establish a Palestinian State in the surrounding territories. Israel has not acquiesced to that demand absent clear disarmament measures. The peace groups, the United Nations (in which fifty-four Moslem states automatically vote against Israel on every issue,) Amnesty International that calls for Israel to lay down its arms and be nicer to the Arab war refugees than their Arab brethren, the surrounding oligarchic Arab nations, and a variety of other large nations with huge monetary motivations, have all called on Israel to make peace with the surrounding Arab nations, that, together with Iran, keep shooting at Israel and are all intent on wiping it off the face of the earth.
Are they all nuts?
When the Moslem world stops shooting and declares that Israel is a fellow state in the Middle East and that they will defend its right to exist against all comers and they will assist Israel to defend that right against any and all attackers, Israel will then sit down at the peace table to realistic negotiations that can lead to peace.
Friday, December 19, 2008
ISRAELI PALESTINIAN PEACE
For my own sense of what is needed to achieve peace between Israel and the Arab world, and especially with the Palestinians who are in the camps and the West Bank, these are my thoughts at the end of 2008.
Recently, a number of high school graduates in Israel, in reaction to Israel's treatment of Palestinians and as conscientious objectors, have refused to enter the armed forces. Army service in Israel is considered to be a necessity of life, entry to adulthood, and a high calling. This refusal is viewed by the Israeli peace movement as a sign of acceptance of Israel's guilt for not allowing peace to move forward.
Many peaceniks, in and out of Israel, almost all of whom are Jewish, appear to believe that achieving peace is in the hands of Israel alone. That is simply not the case. More important, those of us who truly believe in peace and believe it is attainable, realize that the Arab world and the large majority of Palestinians (0ver 85%)do not want peace with Israel. They do want to do anything and everything possible to destroy Israel, up to and including signing peace agreements that by their very terms will mandate Israel's destruction. Peace agreements are put forward that the border states do not intend to honor any more than they have honored existing agreements such as the truce agreements with Lebanon or Hamas in Gaza.
The seeds of peace lie in educating both populations to peace. School textbooks in the Arab world educate students of all ages towards war with Israel and its destruction. Children dressed as suicide bombers are hailed by Arab leaders as role models for their peers. No peace will be attainable so long as this indoctrination continues.
A simple manifestation that Arab leadership is intent on peace mandates cessation of acts of war. Israel continues to be subjected to a variety of such deadly acts.
Maintenance of "refugee" camps and their sustenance by the United Nations since 1948 continues to show the intent of the bordering Arab states to use these sad people to maintain their conflict with Israel.
I am a dedicated peacenik. I am also a realistic peacenik. Israel has made many egregious errors in its dealings with the Palestinians over the years since 1948. However, aside from the two treaties with Egypt and Jordan, no iota of meaningful effort has been made by any Arab state or any Arab person of stature to bring realistic acts and ideas to the peace tables in the past.
An "Arab Peace Initiative" agreed to by fifty-seven Arab and Muslim countries appeared in the New York Times of December 19, 2008, that to the uninitiated and unknowledgeable reads like a good beginning to a negotiated peace with Israel. See U.N. General Assembly Resolution 194 that calls for, among other hits on Israel, a huge area including and surrounding Jerusalem to be internationalized and no longer to the capital of Israel, and the free return to their homes of all prior Arab residents of "Palestine" who fled the 1948 fighting at the insistence of the five invading Arab armies, who have been kept in refugee camps for sixty years by their Arab "brethren" and who now number over 3,000,000 persons. Those sections plus other nails in Israel's coffin are in that resolution. However, if the Arab Peace Initiative was agreed to by Israel, it would cease to exist as a nation in short order.
May Conscientious Objectors continue their actions in Israel. They are clear and good indicators of Israel's willingness to espouse peace. May such people appear safely in the near future in ANY Arab country. Then a serious peace dialogue may be opened with the leadership of that country. When the rockets stop falling from Gaza, an opportunity for peace discussions may open. When suicide bombers cease their attempts to explode themselves in Israel, the roads and checkpoints in Arab territory will be opened as will the possibility of dialogue.
Peace is a multi-sided affair. That fact must be recognized by all who claim they wish for peace in the Middle East between Israel and its neighbors.
Recently, a number of high school graduates in Israel, in reaction to Israel's treatment of Palestinians and as conscientious objectors, have refused to enter the armed forces. Army service in Israel is considered to be a necessity of life, entry to adulthood, and a high calling. This refusal is viewed by the Israeli peace movement as a sign of acceptance of Israel's guilt for not allowing peace to move forward.
Many peaceniks, in and out of Israel, almost all of whom are Jewish, appear to believe that achieving peace is in the hands of Israel alone. That is simply not the case. More important, those of us who truly believe in peace and believe it is attainable, realize that the Arab world and the large majority of Palestinians (0ver 85%)do not want peace with Israel. They do want to do anything and everything possible to destroy Israel, up to and including signing peace agreements that by their very terms will mandate Israel's destruction. Peace agreements are put forward that the border states do not intend to honor any more than they have honored existing agreements such as the truce agreements with Lebanon or Hamas in Gaza.
The seeds of peace lie in educating both populations to peace. School textbooks in the Arab world educate students of all ages towards war with Israel and its destruction. Children dressed as suicide bombers are hailed by Arab leaders as role models for their peers. No peace will be attainable so long as this indoctrination continues.
A simple manifestation that Arab leadership is intent on peace mandates cessation of acts of war. Israel continues to be subjected to a variety of such deadly acts.
Maintenance of "refugee" camps and their sustenance by the United Nations since 1948 continues to show the intent of the bordering Arab states to use these sad people to maintain their conflict with Israel.
I am a dedicated peacenik. I am also a realistic peacenik. Israel has made many egregious errors in its dealings with the Palestinians over the years since 1948. However, aside from the two treaties with Egypt and Jordan, no iota of meaningful effort has been made by any Arab state or any Arab person of stature to bring realistic acts and ideas to the peace tables in the past.
An "Arab Peace Initiative" agreed to by fifty-seven Arab and Muslim countries appeared in the New York Times of December 19, 2008, that to the uninitiated and unknowledgeable reads like a good beginning to a negotiated peace with Israel. See U.N. General Assembly Resolution 194 that calls for, among other hits on Israel, a huge area including and surrounding Jerusalem to be internationalized and no longer to the capital of Israel, and the free return to their homes of all prior Arab residents of "Palestine" who fled the 1948 fighting at the insistence of the five invading Arab armies, who have been kept in refugee camps for sixty years by their Arab "brethren" and who now number over 3,000,000 persons. Those sections plus other nails in Israel's coffin are in that resolution. However, if the Arab Peace Initiative was agreed to by Israel, it would cease to exist as a nation in short order.
May Conscientious Objectors continue their actions in Israel. They are clear and good indicators of Israel's willingness to espouse peace. May such people appear safely in the near future in ANY Arab country. Then a serious peace dialogue may be opened with the leadership of that country. When the rockets stop falling from Gaza, an opportunity for peace discussions may open. When suicide bombers cease their attempts to explode themselves in Israel, the roads and checkpoints in Arab territory will be opened as will the possibility of dialogue.
Peace is a multi-sided affair. That fact must be recognized by all who claim they wish for peace in the Middle East between Israel and its neighbors.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
SUPREME MERCHANTS OF DEATH KILL GUN CONTROL
In America, drug addicts and drug dealers, mentally ill and violent criminals, the speedy very young and the trembling very old, may now buy, use and abuse, deadly firearms! In June of 2008, the Supreme Court voted 5 to 4 to allow the merchants of death and their primary marketing agency, the National Rifle Association, to sell guns to whoever has the money to purchase them. And they agreed to allow every citizen of the United States to carry a weapon, concealed or not, any place at any time. No restrictions! The right to bear arms is our Constitutional right!
How come? Because the Constitution says so, say the five conservatives who voted to overturn the Washington, D.C. firearms code that thoughtfully prohibited a specific segment of the population from carrying weapons in an effort to reduce mayhem in the District. Among the five are a couple of jurists who believe the Constitution and the first ten Amendments should be interpreted to mean exactly what the “Framers” meant when they wrote the words in 1776, EVEN IF WORD MEANINGS CHANGED, REGARDLESS OF ANY CHANGES OF ANY KIND THAT HAVE OCCURRED IN THE COUNTRY SINCE 1776, AND DESPITE HARMFUL RESULTS THAT WILL ENSUE FROM SUCH INTERPRETATIONS.
I can think of some rational basis for such interpretations. Perhaps the judges are being bribed. Or perhaps the judges are mentally ill. Or perhaps the judges are contrarians, sadists, masochists, humorists, misogynists or misanthropes. Or perhaps they are true believers in the Constitution, its words and its authors, similar in nature to believers in the bible and believers that god himself wrote the words of the bible and that those words are holy.
Let death by handguns in Washington, D.C. continue to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America, oh scabrous Scalia and tarnished Thomas, retrograde Roberts, incognito Alito and Can Can Kennedy.
How come? Because the Constitution says so, say the five conservatives who voted to overturn the Washington, D.C. firearms code that thoughtfully prohibited a specific segment of the population from carrying weapons in an effort to reduce mayhem in the District. Among the five are a couple of jurists who believe the Constitution and the first ten Amendments should be interpreted to mean exactly what the “Framers” meant when they wrote the words in 1776, EVEN IF WORD MEANINGS CHANGED, REGARDLESS OF ANY CHANGES OF ANY KIND THAT HAVE OCCURRED IN THE COUNTRY SINCE 1776, AND DESPITE HARMFUL RESULTS THAT WILL ENSUE FROM SUCH INTERPRETATIONS.
I can think of some rational basis for such interpretations. Perhaps the judges are being bribed. Or perhaps the judges are mentally ill. Or perhaps the judges are contrarians, sadists, masochists, humorists, misogynists or misanthropes. Or perhaps they are true believers in the Constitution, its words and its authors, similar in nature to believers in the bible and believers that god himself wrote the words of the bible and that those words are holy.
Let death by handguns in Washington, D.C. continue to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America, oh scabrous Scalia and tarnished Thomas, retrograde Roberts, incognito Alito and Can Can Kennedy.
Saturday, December 13, 2008
MY COUNTRY - RIGHT OR WRONG - FROM A TO Z
From Afghanistan to Zimbabwe, the patridiots (new word) of countries all sound alike; My country - right or wrong.
The catastrophe of Islamic fundamentalists growing poppies for heroin destruction in the Western world in Afghanistan and the primitive savagery with modern weapons destroying Zimbabwe elicit shouts of joy from the patriotic inhabitants of those nations that sound as familiar as the Shouts of American patridiots.
Oklahomans and Koremans, Icelanders and Israelandis, Argentinimans and Somalimans, all salute their flags, sing their anthems, and kill. Does the morality of what their countries do in the world really matter to their patridiotism (new wordd)? No! Not at all.
Pledge allegiance to the flag of the disunited states of the world. No! Pledge allegiance to only one flag, the flag of the country of your citizenship - and devil take the hindmost.
My leader uber alles! My president, my prime minister, my king, my emporor, my dictator, Hail! Heil! Hell!
Thank God I'm PolishFrenchEquadoreanAmericanJapaneseSpanish - because He loves my country, if there is a god. There must be one. Look how beautiful is my country!
And if necessary, I will kill Iraquis, Afghanis, Israelis, Lebanese, Russians, Pakistanis, Chinese, Taiwanese, Sudanese Darfurians, Nigerians, Congolese,and Indians. And if necessary for My God, Americans, too.
So, as we go from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe, let's wave our flags, sing our anthems, pledge our allegiances, follow our leaders, and kill whoever we must, wherever they are, whenever it's necessary, because My Country - Right or Wrong.
Did you learn any new words today?
The catastrophe of Islamic fundamentalists growing poppies for heroin destruction in the Western world in Afghanistan and the primitive savagery with modern weapons destroying Zimbabwe elicit shouts of joy from the patriotic inhabitants of those nations that sound as familiar as the Shouts of American patridiots.
Oklahomans and Koremans, Icelanders and Israelandis, Argentinimans and Somalimans, all salute their flags, sing their anthems, and kill. Does the morality of what their countries do in the world really matter to their patridiotism (new wordd)? No! Not at all.
Pledge allegiance to the flag of the disunited states of the world. No! Pledge allegiance to only one flag, the flag of the country of your citizenship - and devil take the hindmost.
My leader uber alles! My president, my prime minister, my king, my emporor, my dictator, Hail! Heil! Hell!
Thank God I'm PolishFrenchEquadoreanAmericanJapaneseSpanish - because He loves my country, if there is a god. There must be one. Look how beautiful is my country!
And if necessary, I will kill Iraquis, Afghanis, Israelis, Lebanese, Russians, Pakistanis, Chinese, Taiwanese, Sudanese Darfurians, Nigerians, Congolese,and Indians. And if necessary for My God, Americans, too.
So, as we go from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe, let's wave our flags, sing our anthems, pledge our allegiances, follow our leaders, and kill whoever we must, wherever they are, whenever it's necessary, because My Country - Right or Wrong.
Did you learn any new words today?
Thursday, December 11, 2008
DARFUR - A LOOK INTO THE FUTURE
The rape and killing goes on in Darfur and the so-called civilized nations stand by and watch it happening. One can only surmise that the United Nations and the powerful nations of the world are watching what is happening there to project what will happen in there own countries when the division between the powerful and the weak is an invitation to return to pre-civilization, to savagery, to rape and perhaps cannibalism.
Perhaps the perpetrators of this living horror motion picture will be brought to "justice," whatever that means. Or perhaps there will be nations led by similar savages that will veto the namby-pamby responses suggested at confabulations of the powerful. May all these "diplomats" of the African Union and the Arab league lose their wives and children in similar fashion. Then, perhaps, justice will be meted out to those who deserve it by their inaction in the face of raw evil.
George Bush and his administration are equally guilty of rape and homicide and genocide as Omar Hassan al-Bashir and his savages are. May Bush and his minions rot in hell for this monstrous failure to intervene despite knowledge and promises.
The weak, the poor, the illiterate, the chaff of the earth, will die in pain on the dusty plains of Darfur while the powerful smile, pray to God in their churches, shake hands with each other, drink their toasts and smoke their cigars on the green lawns of the White House. This monstrous turning away will not move their consciences one jot or tittle as they go about their business of acquiring more wealth and greater power.
Darfur is a look into the future of mankind. It is the other side of the mountain down which civilization will slide as it returns to the age of hunter gatherer societies eking out their existence on hot dry plains devoid of life-giving vegetation for beasts and humanoids as these upright hairy men club each other for the available worms and insects to nourish themselves and their offspring. If there is a God, may he in his mercy, remove their memory of prior eras.
Perhaps the perpetrators of this living horror motion picture will be brought to "justice," whatever that means. Or perhaps there will be nations led by similar savages that will veto the namby-pamby responses suggested at confabulations of the powerful. May all these "diplomats" of the African Union and the Arab league lose their wives and children in similar fashion. Then, perhaps, justice will be meted out to those who deserve it by their inaction in the face of raw evil.
George Bush and his administration are equally guilty of rape and homicide and genocide as Omar Hassan al-Bashir and his savages are. May Bush and his minions rot in hell for this monstrous failure to intervene despite knowledge and promises.
The weak, the poor, the illiterate, the chaff of the earth, will die in pain on the dusty plains of Darfur while the powerful smile, pray to God in their churches, shake hands with each other, drink their toasts and smoke their cigars on the green lawns of the White House. This monstrous turning away will not move their consciences one jot or tittle as they go about their business of acquiring more wealth and greater power.
Darfur is a look into the future of mankind. It is the other side of the mountain down which civilization will slide as it returns to the age of hunter gatherer societies eking out their existence on hot dry plains devoid of life-giving vegetation for beasts and humanoids as these upright hairy men club each other for the available worms and insects to nourish themselves and their offspring. If there is a God, may he in his mercy, remove their memory of prior eras.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
TERROR, TERRORISM, AND ERRORISM
Terrorism is intended as an instrument of change. It is often the systematic use of terror as a means of coercion. By dictionary agreement, it is the use of force to intimidate and incite fear in a population or government to achieve the acquisition of power. As an instrument it is used by forces that wish to bring about change and/or to create awareness of the need for change.
Terrorism is more often a sledge-hammer than a scalpel, although if the objective is narrow enough, it functions as both. Chasing populations from coveted lands or eradicating them through murder by governments or by militarily stronger forces led by charismatic or religious leaders, is an example of using a scalpel to identify and separate desirable from undesirable populations and using the sledge hammer to wipe out the undesirables. Using a sledge hammer against the twin towers of the World Trade Center accomplished nothing more than useless destruction. It did not lead to fear by the American people nor did it lead to acquisition of land or power or stature in the minds of the American people. It was an act of Errorism par excellence. No change was achieved by the terrorists nor did it create an awareness of a need for change. All it did was enable television-watching poverty-stricken rabble to dance on their rooftops in glee and jealousy at the pain inflicted on the dead, the dying, and their families.
Terrorism is generally an outgrowth of the comfortable use of force by political, military, or religious groupings that have learned their explosive trade and entice gullible naifs to blow themselves up to achieve martyrdom while in the service of non-mainstream entities. The bomb-carrying souls are convinced of the righteousness of their cause and die with the false expectation that many virgins in heaven await them. Those who use terrorism seem to believe that it gives them power or magnifies their power.
Terrorism as a stand-alone strategy is not effective because it does not produce wealth. Huge amounts of wealth are often expended on terrorist attacks. When supported and used by entrenched political and religious entities to eliminate rivals for power, it can sometimes be effective in acquiring wealth and political power. Short term success may be achieved but the resultant de-stabilization hardly leads to long-term goal satisfaction. The counter attacks by the target often reduce the pleasure of success.
Therein lies the essential misconception of the power of terrorism and the difference between terrorism and “errorism.” Errorism is the use of terror to achieve rational results. It just doesn’t work.
Terrorism is more often a sledge-hammer than a scalpel, although if the objective is narrow enough, it functions as both. Chasing populations from coveted lands or eradicating them through murder by governments or by militarily stronger forces led by charismatic or religious leaders, is an example of using a scalpel to identify and separate desirable from undesirable populations and using the sledge hammer to wipe out the undesirables. Using a sledge hammer against the twin towers of the World Trade Center accomplished nothing more than useless destruction. It did not lead to fear by the American people nor did it lead to acquisition of land or power or stature in the minds of the American people. It was an act of Errorism par excellence. No change was achieved by the terrorists nor did it create an awareness of a need for change. All it did was enable television-watching poverty-stricken rabble to dance on their rooftops in glee and jealousy at the pain inflicted on the dead, the dying, and their families.
Terrorism is generally an outgrowth of the comfortable use of force by political, military, or religious groupings that have learned their explosive trade and entice gullible naifs to blow themselves up to achieve martyrdom while in the service of non-mainstream entities. The bomb-carrying souls are convinced of the righteousness of their cause and die with the false expectation that many virgins in heaven await them. Those who use terrorism seem to believe that it gives them power or magnifies their power.
Terrorism as a stand-alone strategy is not effective because it does not produce wealth. Huge amounts of wealth are often expended on terrorist attacks. When supported and used by entrenched political and religious entities to eliminate rivals for power, it can sometimes be effective in acquiring wealth and political power. Short term success may be achieved but the resultant de-stabilization hardly leads to long-term goal satisfaction. The counter attacks by the target often reduce the pleasure of success.
Therein lies the essential misconception of the power of terrorism and the difference between terrorism and “errorism.” Errorism is the use of terror to achieve rational results. It just doesn’t work.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
STATE RELIGION vs. FREEDOM OF RELIGION
State religion and government are in collusion to assure the continuity of the government and to assure the accrual of wealth by the state’s power elites. If the representatives of the state’s religion, the high priests, mullahs, bishops and other high functionaries, behave appropriately, they and their religions and co-functionaries will also be assured of the continuity of their wealth stream. (They will not be assured of entry to heaven, though.) The Catholic Church in Italy and the Sunni hierarchy of Islam in Saudi Arabia and the Shia hierarchy in Iran, are perfect examples of that collusion and set examples for like cooperative arrangements across the world
The same is true of states with “freedom of religion” where people of all faiths have access to power. Freedom of religion enables competing members of power elites of all faiths to accrue wealth by aligning themselves and colluding with governments that contain members of many faiths. However, the sign on the door states, "ATHEISTS NOT WELCOME"
Collusion in all cases simply means sharing wealth through a quid pro quo arrangement with government factotums who occupy decision-making positions in the enormous variety of offices that control contract-letting, purchasing, industry-wide rules committees, pork barrel aficionados, and other gate-keepers of government controlled money. You kiss my ring and I’ll kiss yours.
Several distinctions between the power elites and their government puppets work to the benefit and detriment of the puppets. The major distinction is that government functionaries must have the positions of influence to produce the benefits. They must be elected and they must be re-elected. They must have relationships with others in their fields who also seek benefits. But they benefit from their relationships by acquiring the funds necessary to get re-elected and funds to satisfy the needs and demands of electorates that will vote them into office.
In the United States, no atheist stands a reasonable chance of being elected to any office, high or low. A Google website claims five elected atheist officials in the entire United States at this time. (Pete Stark, congressman from California, among them.) So, where is the separation of church and state? Obviously, religion is a key to the door of election to government office. Sarah Palin can attest to that religious “truth.”
The same is true of states with “freedom of religion” where people of all faiths have access to power. Freedom of religion enables competing members of power elites of all faiths to accrue wealth by aligning themselves and colluding with governments that contain members of many faiths. However, the sign on the door states, "ATHEISTS NOT WELCOME"
Collusion in all cases simply means sharing wealth through a quid pro quo arrangement with government factotums who occupy decision-making positions in the enormous variety of offices that control contract-letting, purchasing, industry-wide rules committees, pork barrel aficionados, and other gate-keepers of government controlled money. You kiss my ring and I’ll kiss yours.
Several distinctions between the power elites and their government puppets work to the benefit and detriment of the puppets. The major distinction is that government functionaries must have the positions of influence to produce the benefits. They must be elected and they must be re-elected. They must have relationships with others in their fields who also seek benefits. But they benefit from their relationships by acquiring the funds necessary to get re-elected and funds to satisfy the needs and demands of electorates that will vote them into office.
In the United States, no atheist stands a reasonable chance of being elected to any office, high or low. A Google website claims five elected atheist officials in the entire United States at this time. (Pete Stark, congressman from California, among them.) So, where is the separation of church and state? Obviously, religion is a key to the door of election to government office. Sarah Palin can attest to that religious “truth.”
NON-STATE ACTORS WITH VESTED INTERESTS
"The terrorists want to destroy Pakistan, too. (NY Times 12/9/08) by Asif Ali Zardari, president of Pakistan: The Mumbai attacks were directed not only at India but also at Pakistan's new democratic government and the peace process with India that we have initiated. Supporters of authoritarianism in Pakistan and !!non-state actors with a vested interest!! in perpetuating conflict do not want change in Pakistan to take root."
This phrase, “NON-STATE ACTORS WITH VESTED INTERESTS,” with some linguistic variations, appears in many news items that indicate a desire by those actors to perpetuate existing governments and government institutions and practices, or to change the governments. Other similar phrases are used to describe people and the multifarious establishments they represent without providing sufficient information to identify them or identify how they act to achieve success in their missions.
However, they are actors with interests, and they act to protect and enhance their interests. And they act outside the exposed states and governments they influence for their benefit and for the benefit of those for whom they exert themselves, namely, power elites; wealth and the wealthy. The “actors” generally are combinations of members of power elites and their employees, the so-called “lobbyists.”
Acquiring a government contract to provide goods or services for any of the branches of government, for instance, is generally an enterprise that is rarely open to scrutiny as it might be in the open commercial markets of a country. The amount of money the government spends on everything from pencils to planes, far outstrips what is paid in the open market. Also, where in most commercial dealings, competition determines price paid, in government, competitive bidding is often so designed as to eliminate all but one bidder, the result of a non-state actor having an “in.” So a hammer that might cost $2.95 in the local hardware store, costs the government $45. And you, the taxpayer, pay for that exhorbitant discrepancy.
There are more deleterious impacts on government functioning by non-state actors than paying exorbitant prices for simple goods. Protecting the common people, the lower and middle classes, providing for the common good, providing government services (education, health care, police protection, etc,) adequately for the non-power elites, all suffer in the conflict waged by power elites for acquisition and control of the money that pours into government coffers, control of, or absence of control of, manufacturing and mining processes, and control of natural resources. The taking in taxes from the powerless to provide for the interests of the powerful, is an unfair match as much as minimum wage and occupational safety control.
Wealth is created by using the country’s natural resources and expending labor on them. Those natural resources are owned for the most part by the government and the power elites. The wealth created is shared in a grossly unequal fashion between the lower and middle classes on the one hand, and the government-protected power elites on the other.
If the government does not protect the power elites, it will be overthrown in the oligarch/dictator countries of the world or voted out of office in the democracies and semi-democracies of the world. In all cases, the non-state actors with vested interests control the “democratic” process in the democracies and the distribution of wealth in the dictatorships and oligarchies.
So, when you open your newspaper or magazine and see the phrase, “non-state actors,” you know what and who the author is writing about. And you will know that they all have “vested interests.”
This phrase, “NON-STATE ACTORS WITH VESTED INTERESTS,” with some linguistic variations, appears in many news items that indicate a desire by those actors to perpetuate existing governments and government institutions and practices, or to change the governments. Other similar phrases are used to describe people and the multifarious establishments they represent without providing sufficient information to identify them or identify how they act to achieve success in their missions.
However, they are actors with interests, and they act to protect and enhance their interests. And they act outside the exposed states and governments they influence for their benefit and for the benefit of those for whom they exert themselves, namely, power elites; wealth and the wealthy. The “actors” generally are combinations of members of power elites and their employees, the so-called “lobbyists.”
Acquiring a government contract to provide goods or services for any of the branches of government, for instance, is generally an enterprise that is rarely open to scrutiny as it might be in the open commercial markets of a country. The amount of money the government spends on everything from pencils to planes, far outstrips what is paid in the open market. Also, where in most commercial dealings, competition determines price paid, in government, competitive bidding is often so designed as to eliminate all but one bidder, the result of a non-state actor having an “in.” So a hammer that might cost $2.95 in the local hardware store, costs the government $45. And you, the taxpayer, pay for that exhorbitant discrepancy.
There are more deleterious impacts on government functioning by non-state actors than paying exorbitant prices for simple goods. Protecting the common people, the lower and middle classes, providing for the common good, providing government services (education, health care, police protection, etc,) adequately for the non-power elites, all suffer in the conflict waged by power elites for acquisition and control of the money that pours into government coffers, control of, or absence of control of, manufacturing and mining processes, and control of natural resources. The taking in taxes from the powerless to provide for the interests of the powerful, is an unfair match as much as minimum wage and occupational safety control.
Wealth is created by using the country’s natural resources and expending labor on them. Those natural resources are owned for the most part by the government and the power elites. The wealth created is shared in a grossly unequal fashion between the lower and middle classes on the one hand, and the government-protected power elites on the other.
If the government does not protect the power elites, it will be overthrown in the oligarch/dictator countries of the world or voted out of office in the democracies and semi-democracies of the world. In all cases, the non-state actors with vested interests control the “democratic” process in the democracies and the distribution of wealth in the dictatorships and oligarchies.
So, when you open your newspaper or magazine and see the phrase, “non-state actors,” you know what and who the author is writing about. And you will know that they all have “vested interests.”
Monday, December 8, 2008
NO MOB VETO
The New York Times of December 5, 2008, carried a full page ad titled, “NO MOB VETO.”
The thirteen signers agreed to its very first - and verifiably truthful - sentence, “We’re a disagreeable lot.”
After obtaining information about the signatories and their backgrounds and organizations, the accuracy of that statement becomes amazingly clear. They indeed are a disagreeable lot. They are all Republicans, they range from Conservatives to extreme right wingers. And they all are adept at creating scary images of gays, liberals, Democrats, and Obama, among other bug-a-boos, with hyperbole such as “MOB” to identify those who strongly oppose what they believe to be sweet and sane anti-gay behavior, initiating and propagandizing a California Constitutional amendment through false T.V. advertising with an enormous outlay of money.
NoMobVeto.org is a project of The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, an organization that purports to be a defender of religions against violence, VERBAL violence. This disagreeable lot, this right-wing mob, objects verbally and vehemently to your VERBAL and possibly vehement objections to California’s Proposition 8 that now constitutionally prohibits gay marriage.
So they want to veto your right to object to religion’s use of church funds, especially the Mormon church’s huge money war-chest, to vehemently initiate and promote a constitutional ban on gay marriage in California. (Do gays frighten Mormon polygamists more than do heterosexuals?) Clearly, the concept of “Separation of Church and State” is what they, as devout religionists, have determined that freedom to be; always bad for you and all ways good for us.
The moral of this story is that the Times ad was designed to “coerce your opponents into silence” while averring that your opponents were doing that to you. The NO MOB VETO ad describing opponents of Prop 8 as a mob, shows the nature of the Religious Right as a disagreeable MOB.
P.S. The United States State Department contributed to the ad.
P.P.S. Many of the supporter organizations of the ad maintain offices and lobbyists in or near Washington, D.C.
The thirteen signers agreed to its very first - and verifiably truthful - sentence, “We’re a disagreeable lot.”
After obtaining information about the signatories and their backgrounds and organizations, the accuracy of that statement becomes amazingly clear. They indeed are a disagreeable lot. They are all Republicans, they range from Conservatives to extreme right wingers. And they all are adept at creating scary images of gays, liberals, Democrats, and Obama, among other bug-a-boos, with hyperbole such as “MOB” to identify those who strongly oppose what they believe to be sweet and sane anti-gay behavior, initiating and propagandizing a California Constitutional amendment through false T.V. advertising with an enormous outlay of money.
NoMobVeto.org is a project of The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, an organization that purports to be a defender of religions against violence, VERBAL violence. This disagreeable lot, this right-wing mob, objects verbally and vehemently to your VERBAL and possibly vehement objections to California’s Proposition 8 that now constitutionally prohibits gay marriage.
So they want to veto your right to object to religion’s use of church funds, especially the Mormon church’s huge money war-chest, to vehemently initiate and promote a constitutional ban on gay marriage in California. (Do gays frighten Mormon polygamists more than do heterosexuals?) Clearly, the concept of “Separation of Church and State” is what they, as devout religionists, have determined that freedom to be; always bad for you and all ways good for us.
The moral of this story is that the Times ad was designed to “coerce your opponents into silence” while averring that your opponents were doing that to you. The NO MOB VETO ad describing opponents of Prop 8 as a mob, shows the nature of the Religious Right as a disagreeable MOB.
P.S. The United States State Department contributed to the ad.
P.P.S. Many of the supporter organizations of the ad maintain offices and lobbyists in or near Washington, D.C.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
THE HISTORY OF RELIGION
Part One - Betrayal of Belief
Religion is the edifice built upon people’s need to believe in a higher power and their need to explain the inexplicable and provide answers to the unknowable. They are the institutionalized systems that incorporate people’s attitudes, beliefs, and practices that are then exploited by charlatans for their aggrandizement. True pious believers of stature and honest belief preach to the masses from the pulpit at the front of the stage while the real action is taking place behind the drawn curtains of religious edifices, the acquisition of wealth and power.
At the time, about thirteen thousand years ago, that some human-inhabited geographic areas began the move from hunter-gatherer societies to communities of herders and farmers, religion came into existence. Prior to the establishment of permanent habitation, there are no signs of organized religious structures or systems of worship. The single outstanding difference between migratory and sedentary societies is the accumulation of wealth through surplus production of agricultural products and the goods, services, and habitation needs of people in those societies. Surplus led to barter and to the exchange of goods for services and the establishment of specialized craftsmanship, to the accumulation of wealth and its byproduct, power, and the byproduct of both, stratification of societies with richer and poorer, stronger and weaker.
It is reasonable to assume and there is some anthropological evidence that prior to the establishment of religion, people believed in “higher” or supernatural powers. The indiscriminate equation of the laws of nature and the universe with the existence of superhuman powers probably arose in human cognition with the growth in awareness of the immensity and vastness of natural forces and the recognition of human inability to control or affect those forces. Thus began man’s belief in gods that manipulated natural forces. However, primitive clans, families, individuals, and tribes, were busy trying to feed themselves rather than allocating time and material to the worship of superior powers. Perhaps early man prayed or danced for rain or successful hunting without religious leaders, houses of worship, and sacramental equipment. Stories were told and re-told through generations of events or people that in some way influenced the forces of nature. The skeleton of belief embedded in religion was erected as the stories spread from individuals through families, then tribes and clans, and into structured societies. Belief was the need and religion was the ready answer.
Early statues and objects thought to be conceptualizations of powerful gods have been unearthed with little more than their existence as evidence of modern man’s belief in higher powers. Burial grounds were non-existent in early migratory periods, so even prayer to an especially powerful human predecessor was improbable. But the idea of being able to influence or propitiate those powers through prayer, gifts, and sacrifice contributed to the birth of religions and their parasitic institutions. Religions and the formalities attached to their practice were created and exploited by those who saw power and a profit in them, as is generally the case with so many human inventions. The absence of the shards of religion throughout the million years of humankind’s existence prior to the revolution that took place when animal and land husbandry began to show a profit provides some evidence of when religion reared its head.
The strongest nail in the creation of religious edifices was the invention of writing. In the Western World, writing based on an alphabet came into use approximately three and a half thousand years ago. The rules and regulations enumerated and ritualized in religious tomes could be spread among the populations and pointed to by religionists as having emanated from god simply because the laity did not know how to read. The Old Testament and Christian bibles, the Koran, the Book of Mormon, and other religions’ foundational books are passed off as the word of God. How convenient that they are objects of belief, belief in their holiness and belief that they are god-written, "the word of god" whose authority may not be questioned. What a gold mine.
Part Two – Religion and Wealth
Though the books may not have changed, changing times have forced religionists into exegeses, into explanations and interpretations of original “holy” works and subsequent “holy” writings that would make some sort of sense to the contemporary audience. The Renaissance and the Enlightenment were historical periods that expanded man’s knowledge of the world around him; it also expanded hugely the capacity to produce wealth.
The driving force behind the work of religionists was and is wealth accumulation. If Jesus drove the money lenders from the temple, what did that mean in His day? What does that mean today? And what has it meant, especially to money lenders and the perception of money lenders, through the two thousand years since Jesus acted as he is purported to have acted. And whose perception of money lenders counts, anyway? The crucial question that must always be answered is, “If wealth accumulation is at odds with religious teachings, how are religious teachings adjusted to conform to wealth acquisition?
The crucial answer is that religious teachings ALWAYS conform to wealth acquisition. The purpose and goal of religious teachings IS wealth accumulation. All other aspects of religion, whether stolen from ethical humanism or other ethical philosophies, or whether other aspects of religion are designed solely to mesmerize people into adhering to the particular religion by proselytizing propagandizing missionaries through song and dance or food or “spiritual” sustenance with promises that cannot knowingly be kept, are all designed to increase material support for the religious hierarchy and, thereby, the power elites.
Religions and governments function on behalf of and at the behest of power elites. Both entities provide education to the masses to achieve allegiance and pander to prejudice and intolerance of non-believers and “foreigners.” Strong believers and patriots support the two main systems whereby masses of people are controlled and motivated to act for the benefit of power elites; religion and government. In the church it is called volunteerism. In business that is called marketing.
And in every community there is an “acceptable” house of prayer. A sufficient number of believers and a paid Shaman start the process of marketing and as the congregation grows, the religious services expand to ever greater attractiveness. Proselytizing cum marketing is ordained from above, not heaven but rather hierarchy. And, since disparaged money lies at the root of this growth demand, the unique tools of marketing religion come into play. “Your soul will burn in Hell for eternity and only by conversion to our brand of soft soap will you be saved.”
Part Three - Religion and Murder
Anti-religious propaganda is patently against the interests of religion and power. Only violence or war against a religion in the acquisition and defense of power is acceptable. Power is money, land, assets in the way of cattle or slaves, adherents and believers who work to increase the flock. Such valuables are envied and fought over and fought for in the name of the true God. This is how our world was and is run. This is how our world will be run in the future.
Religious terrorists, or priests and preachers, indoctrinated to hate and attack “non-believers,” will acquire weapons of mass destruction and wreak havoc on the world’s populations in the names of their “Gods.” Those Gods are the protectors of the believing wealthy, Wahabists, Catholics, Protestants and other Christian sects, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, pantheists and nativists, Bhuddists, etcetera, etcetera, all in their chosen variety of their religions with all their symbols of numerology, clothing, forms of prayer, food requirements, holy days, and bibles from which their esoteric beliefs and functions differentiate them from others.
Only the Jews preach “Peace.” And that is reason enough to kill them. And, since the Jews do not proselytize nor, until 1948, did they have an army, it was easy enough to slaughter them like animals.
Now, in 2008, billions of Moslems would once again presume to exterminate them, and, they are actively working on the methods to achieve that goal. (Iran in particular with its stated and avowed goal of extermination, is actively working on the development of nuclear weapons to realize their holy mission on earth.) With the help of most of the nations on the face of the earth, gathered in the United Nations in their single-minded pursuit to first, delegitimize this most creative human strain, and then, banded together politically and militarily, plan to march as Crusaders of old to chase them from Jerusalem and the “Holy Land.” That is, the Land that the Jews made holy and where they have gathered after Hitler’s and Germany’s failure to achieve total elimination.
Thus, religion has shown its ugly dirty insidious face to the world. Prejudice against women, Gays, Gypsies, Atheists, and other various illogical, often crazy, single-minded and narrow-minded pursuits by the enormous variety of institutions established to bring God to earth for the “benefit” of humankind, must alert narrow-believers and non-believers to the dangers they face by being different from their pursuers, different from “other” religions and religionists.
And, all thinking, caring, aware, humane, knowledgeable people, must also be prepared to do battle against the religious killers of the world.
Religion is the edifice built upon people’s need to believe in a higher power and their need to explain the inexplicable and provide answers to the unknowable. They are the institutionalized systems that incorporate people’s attitudes, beliefs, and practices that are then exploited by charlatans for their aggrandizement. True pious believers of stature and honest belief preach to the masses from the pulpit at the front of the stage while the real action is taking place behind the drawn curtains of religious edifices, the acquisition of wealth and power.
At the time, about thirteen thousand years ago, that some human-inhabited geographic areas began the move from hunter-gatherer societies to communities of herders and farmers, religion came into existence. Prior to the establishment of permanent habitation, there are no signs of organized religious structures or systems of worship. The single outstanding difference between migratory and sedentary societies is the accumulation of wealth through surplus production of agricultural products and the goods, services, and habitation needs of people in those societies. Surplus led to barter and to the exchange of goods for services and the establishment of specialized craftsmanship, to the accumulation of wealth and its byproduct, power, and the byproduct of both, stratification of societies with richer and poorer, stronger and weaker.
It is reasonable to assume and there is some anthropological evidence that prior to the establishment of religion, people believed in “higher” or supernatural powers. The indiscriminate equation of the laws of nature and the universe with the existence of superhuman powers probably arose in human cognition with the growth in awareness of the immensity and vastness of natural forces and the recognition of human inability to control or affect those forces. Thus began man’s belief in gods that manipulated natural forces. However, primitive clans, families, individuals, and tribes, were busy trying to feed themselves rather than allocating time and material to the worship of superior powers. Perhaps early man prayed or danced for rain or successful hunting without religious leaders, houses of worship, and sacramental equipment. Stories were told and re-told through generations of events or people that in some way influenced the forces of nature. The skeleton of belief embedded in religion was erected as the stories spread from individuals through families, then tribes and clans, and into structured societies. Belief was the need and religion was the ready answer.
Early statues and objects thought to be conceptualizations of powerful gods have been unearthed with little more than their existence as evidence of modern man’s belief in higher powers. Burial grounds were non-existent in early migratory periods, so even prayer to an especially powerful human predecessor was improbable. But the idea of being able to influence or propitiate those powers through prayer, gifts, and sacrifice contributed to the birth of religions and their parasitic institutions. Religions and the formalities attached to their practice were created and exploited by those who saw power and a profit in them, as is generally the case with so many human inventions. The absence of the shards of religion throughout the million years of humankind’s existence prior to the revolution that took place when animal and land husbandry began to show a profit provides some evidence of when religion reared its head.
The strongest nail in the creation of religious edifices was the invention of writing. In the Western World, writing based on an alphabet came into use approximately three and a half thousand years ago. The rules and regulations enumerated and ritualized in religious tomes could be spread among the populations and pointed to by religionists as having emanated from god simply because the laity did not know how to read. The Old Testament and Christian bibles, the Koran, the Book of Mormon, and other religions’ foundational books are passed off as the word of God. How convenient that they are objects of belief, belief in their holiness and belief that they are god-written, "the word of god" whose authority may not be questioned. What a gold mine.
Part Two – Religion and Wealth
Though the books may not have changed, changing times have forced religionists into exegeses, into explanations and interpretations of original “holy” works and subsequent “holy” writings that would make some sort of sense to the contemporary audience. The Renaissance and the Enlightenment were historical periods that expanded man’s knowledge of the world around him; it also expanded hugely the capacity to produce wealth.
The driving force behind the work of religionists was and is wealth accumulation. If Jesus drove the money lenders from the temple, what did that mean in His day? What does that mean today? And what has it meant, especially to money lenders and the perception of money lenders, through the two thousand years since Jesus acted as he is purported to have acted. And whose perception of money lenders counts, anyway? The crucial question that must always be answered is, “If wealth accumulation is at odds with religious teachings, how are religious teachings adjusted to conform to wealth acquisition?
The crucial answer is that religious teachings ALWAYS conform to wealth acquisition. The purpose and goal of religious teachings IS wealth accumulation. All other aspects of religion, whether stolen from ethical humanism or other ethical philosophies, or whether other aspects of religion are designed solely to mesmerize people into adhering to the particular religion by proselytizing propagandizing missionaries through song and dance or food or “spiritual” sustenance with promises that cannot knowingly be kept, are all designed to increase material support for the religious hierarchy and, thereby, the power elites.
Religions and governments function on behalf of and at the behest of power elites. Both entities provide education to the masses to achieve allegiance and pander to prejudice and intolerance of non-believers and “foreigners.” Strong believers and patriots support the two main systems whereby masses of people are controlled and motivated to act for the benefit of power elites; religion and government. In the church it is called volunteerism. In business that is called marketing.
And in every community there is an “acceptable” house of prayer. A sufficient number of believers and a paid Shaman start the process of marketing and as the congregation grows, the religious services expand to ever greater attractiveness. Proselytizing cum marketing is ordained from above, not heaven but rather hierarchy. And, since disparaged money lies at the root of this growth demand, the unique tools of marketing religion come into play. “Your soul will burn in Hell for eternity and only by conversion to our brand of soft soap will you be saved.”
Part Three - Religion and Murder
Anti-religious propaganda is patently against the interests of religion and power. Only violence or war against a religion in the acquisition and defense of power is acceptable. Power is money, land, assets in the way of cattle or slaves, adherents and believers who work to increase the flock. Such valuables are envied and fought over and fought for in the name of the true God. This is how our world was and is run. This is how our world will be run in the future.
Religious terrorists, or priests and preachers, indoctrinated to hate and attack “non-believers,” will acquire weapons of mass destruction and wreak havoc on the world’s populations in the names of their “Gods.” Those Gods are the protectors of the believing wealthy, Wahabists, Catholics, Protestants and other Christian sects, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, pantheists and nativists, Bhuddists, etcetera, etcetera, all in their chosen variety of their religions with all their symbols of numerology, clothing, forms of prayer, food requirements, holy days, and bibles from which their esoteric beliefs and functions differentiate them from others.
Only the Jews preach “Peace.” And that is reason enough to kill them. And, since the Jews do not proselytize nor, until 1948, did they have an army, it was easy enough to slaughter them like animals.
Now, in 2008, billions of Moslems would once again presume to exterminate them, and, they are actively working on the methods to achieve that goal. (Iran in particular with its stated and avowed goal of extermination, is actively working on the development of nuclear weapons to realize their holy mission on earth.) With the help of most of the nations on the face of the earth, gathered in the United Nations in their single-minded pursuit to first, delegitimize this most creative human strain, and then, banded together politically and militarily, plan to march as Crusaders of old to chase them from Jerusalem and the “Holy Land.” That is, the Land that the Jews made holy and where they have gathered after Hitler’s and Germany’s failure to achieve total elimination.
Thus, religion has shown its ugly dirty insidious face to the world. Prejudice against women, Gays, Gypsies, Atheists, and other various illogical, often crazy, single-minded and narrow-minded pursuits by the enormous variety of institutions established to bring God to earth for the “benefit” of humankind, must alert narrow-believers and non-believers to the dangers they face by being different from their pursuers, different from “other” religions and religionists.
And, all thinking, caring, aware, humane, knowledgeable people, must also be prepared to do battle against the religious killers of the world.
Saturday, December 6, 2008
CHURCH SPLIT OVER GAYS
So, the United States pisscopalian church is splitting over gay existence. A presumptuous gay wants to become a pisscopalian bishop.
It’s true that gays are not the same as non-gays. No one is the same as anyone else. If there is a God, He made it that way. Don’t anti-gay people know that?
Of course, there may not be a God. So the pisscopalians are in deep doo doo, because they are different from everyone else.
For some reason, perhaps because of discrimination, gays seem to be more sensitive than straights. And that seems to push them to be more creative, more sensitive, more caring. Not all of them, of course. Some are prejudiced and hard assed just like pisscopalians. I suppose that’s true of any class of people. Within the class there are all kinds of people. That’s because everyone is different from everyone else. Lot's of gays cut hair, dance, design clothing, create art, music,theater and movies, and generally seem to be in the forefront of mankind's creative urges out of proportion to their numbers.
By their very existence, they rouse mentally disturbed or insecure people to attack them. And now, a major religious institution is attacking them.
What this seems to indicate is that religions are no different from other man-made institutions. And religions are what all religions seem to be about. “We represent God on earth. Other religions are not as good as we are. Give us your money. We’ll make sure you get to heaven.” And lots of religions teach their believers to kill the other guy. I guess they have to do that if they represent God on earth.
I’m not sure why, though.
12/7/08
LOVED THIS ONE! I RE-READ IT A FEW TIMES AND THEN SUBSTITUTED THE WORD JEW FOR GAY IN EVERY INSTANCE AND IT ALSO MAKES SENSE. YOU COULD SUBSTITUTE ALMOST ANYONE IN THE SAME WAY..BLACK, HISPANIC, ETC. HAPPY HOLIDAYS AND LOVE TO ALL, BJ
It’s true that gays are not the same as non-gays. No one is the same as anyone else. If there is a God, He made it that way. Don’t anti-gay people know that?
Of course, there may not be a God. So the pisscopalians are in deep doo doo, because they are different from everyone else.
For some reason, perhaps because of discrimination, gays seem to be more sensitive than straights. And that seems to push them to be more creative, more sensitive, more caring. Not all of them, of course. Some are prejudiced and hard assed just like pisscopalians. I suppose that’s true of any class of people. Within the class there are all kinds of people. That’s because everyone is different from everyone else. Lot's of gays cut hair, dance, design clothing, create art, music,theater and movies, and generally seem to be in the forefront of mankind's creative urges out of proportion to their numbers.
By their very existence, they rouse mentally disturbed or insecure people to attack them. And now, a major religious institution is attacking them.
What this seems to indicate is that religions are no different from other man-made institutions. And religions are what all religions seem to be about. “We represent God on earth. Other religions are not as good as we are. Give us your money. We’ll make sure you get to heaven.” And lots of religions teach their believers to kill the other guy. I guess they have to do that if they represent God on earth.
I’m not sure why, though.
12/7/08
LOVED THIS ONE! I RE-READ IT A FEW TIMES AND THEN SUBSTITUTED THE WORD JEW FOR GAY IN EVERY INSTANCE AND IT ALSO MAKES SENSE. YOU COULD SUBSTITUTE ALMOST ANYONE IN THE SAME WAY..BLACK, HISPANIC, ETC. HAPPY HOLIDAYS AND LOVE TO ALL, BJ
Monday, December 1, 2008
MORTAL SwINdle
A Catholic priest has determined that those who voted for Barack Obama have committed a “mortal sin.” First, the definition from Webster’s, “A sin (as murder) that is deliberately committed and is of such serious consequences according to Thomist (St. Thomas Aquinas) theology that it deprives the soul of sanctifying grace.”
The priest appears to have taken a leap of fact by implying that those who voted for Barack Obama should run to confession immediately for they have committed a mortal sin even though they have not committed murder or its equivalent, abortion, because, per the dictat of the Catholic Church, a vote for Obama is equivalent to having an abortion or agreeing for someone else to have an abortion – or commit murder.
For those Catholics who voted for Obama and need “sanctifying grace,” that presumably is available in the confessionals of the church system, the priest admonishes that they should go immediately. Is the urgency due to the faulty memory of God? Or is it simply a matter of, “The sooner, the better?” and the greater likelihood of success in achieving grace?
Historically, the Catholic Church has been in favor of large families. It is reasonable to assume that the greater the number of adherents to the faith, the greater the amount of alms collected in church baskets and the more donations of work and provisions will be provided, thereby enhancing the power of the Church Frightening the poor, the uneducated, the primitive, to join the church to save their souls from burning in hell by paying an entrance fee and accepting the dictates of earthly beings in elegant uniforms, is surely voodooism at its worst. Let the need for adherents lead the priests to procreate.
The Jewish faith has survived its fifty centuries of existence notwithstanding its acceptance of small families and abortion on demand pursuant to the needs of the mothers and their families. At no point in this long history has abortion ever been a religious issue by denying heaven or religious acceptance to those connected with the always sad need for the procedure, intimately determined.
Finally, this loud priestly declaration on behalf of the Catholic Church screams out for protection of the sanctity of the separation of church and state. Under what political freedom does the Catholic Church interfere with the political decisions and political will of its believers? Stay quietly in your church, Oh Priest, ye political sinner.
The priest appears to have taken a leap of fact by implying that those who voted for Barack Obama should run to confession immediately for they have committed a mortal sin even though they have not committed murder or its equivalent, abortion, because, per the dictat of the Catholic Church, a vote for Obama is equivalent to having an abortion or agreeing for someone else to have an abortion – or commit murder.
For those Catholics who voted for Obama and need “sanctifying grace,” that presumably is available in the confessionals of the church system, the priest admonishes that they should go immediately. Is the urgency due to the faulty memory of God? Or is it simply a matter of, “The sooner, the better?” and the greater likelihood of success in achieving grace?
Historically, the Catholic Church has been in favor of large families. It is reasonable to assume that the greater the number of adherents to the faith, the greater the amount of alms collected in church baskets and the more donations of work and provisions will be provided, thereby enhancing the power of the Church Frightening the poor, the uneducated, the primitive, to join the church to save their souls from burning in hell by paying an entrance fee and accepting the dictates of earthly beings in elegant uniforms, is surely voodooism at its worst. Let the need for adherents lead the priests to procreate.
The Jewish faith has survived its fifty centuries of existence notwithstanding its acceptance of small families and abortion on demand pursuant to the needs of the mothers and their families. At no point in this long history has abortion ever been a religious issue by denying heaven or religious acceptance to those connected with the always sad need for the procedure, intimately determined.
Finally, this loud priestly declaration on behalf of the Catholic Church screams out for protection of the sanctity of the separation of church and state. Under what political freedom does the Catholic Church interfere with the political decisions and political will of its believers? Stay quietly in your church, Oh Priest, ye political sinner.
Sunday, November 30, 2008
IF GOD IS TO BRING PEACE, THERE WILL ALWAYS BE WAR
From the (San Jose) Mercury News wire services:
The U.N. General Assembly overwhelmingly endorsed the idea of an unprecedented treaty regulating the global arms trade, despite opposition from the United States.
Of the U.N.’s 192 member nations, 147 voted in favor of drafting the treaty. Only the U.S. and Zimbabwe voted against it, with the other nations absent or abstaining.
What do the United States and Zimbabwe have in common?
Both heads of state were illegally elected. Mugabe, the dictator who seized power after being elected out of office, needs armaments to protect his illegal control of Zimbabwe and also to slaughter opponents of his regime. George W. Bush, elected by the Supreme Court of the United States against the clear vote of the citizenry of the country, must repay the armaments industry that contributed heavily to his election campaign.
Mugabe’s actions and the reasons for them are clearly discernable. He and his supporters are the power elite of Zimbabwe. Bush’s actions are cloaked by the opaque curtain drawn between the government of the United States and the power elites behind the curtain that manipulate the strings of the elected puppets acting on the stage in front of that curtain, for their benefit.
So, if there is a God, and if He wanted to bring peace to the world, He is finessed by the more powerful forces driving for ever greater wealth and greater power. It is also possible that if there is a God, He belongs to the power elites of the world.
The U.N. General Assembly overwhelmingly endorsed the idea of an unprecedented treaty regulating the global arms trade, despite opposition from the United States.
Of the U.N.’s 192 member nations, 147 voted in favor of drafting the treaty. Only the U.S. and Zimbabwe voted against it, with the other nations absent or abstaining.
What do the United States and Zimbabwe have in common?
Both heads of state were illegally elected. Mugabe, the dictator who seized power after being elected out of office, needs armaments to protect his illegal control of Zimbabwe and also to slaughter opponents of his regime. George W. Bush, elected by the Supreme Court of the United States against the clear vote of the citizenry of the country, must repay the armaments industry that contributed heavily to his election campaign.
Mugabe’s actions and the reasons for them are clearly discernable. He and his supporters are the power elite of Zimbabwe. Bush’s actions are cloaked by the opaque curtain drawn between the government of the United States and the power elites behind the curtain that manipulate the strings of the elected puppets acting on the stage in front of that curtain, for their benefit.
So, if there is a God, and if He wanted to bring peace to the world, He is finessed by the more powerful forces driving for ever greater wealth and greater power. It is also possible that if there is a God, He belongs to the power elites of the world.
Saturday, November 29, 2008
HOW THE WEST SUPPORTS TERRORISM
Manufacturers of weaponry used in terror attacks are mostly located in the Western world. The cockamaimy export regulations used by these nations as safeguards against weaponry falling into inappropriate unacceptable hands are obviously useless, and obviously, intentionally useless.
Merchants of death throughout the world have no problems supplying their clients with whatever they want in arms and munitions so long as the dollars (and only dollars) are there to pay for them. Terrorists of all stripes, mini-revolutionaries, governmental terrorists ala Mugabe, rapists and land-grabbers, Muslims, Sikhs, past and present Russians, American loonies, Indians and Pakistanis, Phillipinos and Palestinians, Kurds and Turks, and the list goes on and on barely describing who and why they need killing tools and against whom those tools will be used.
The vast land of the United States will become a killing ground in the same way that other sophisticated modern nations will become killing grounds; because the weapons of terror are available and easily obtained. The Supreme Idiot Court of the United States has upheld the right of all citizens to bear arms. What enormous gigantic power lies in the hands of arms manufacturers and merchants to be able to obtain a majority of the justices to twist the clearly stated language of the 2nd Amendment to the United States Constitution that calls for citizens' RIGHT to bear arms in a WELL REGULATED MILITIA.
When sufficient money enters the cabals that hold violent beliefs, the country will recognize the errors of ommission and commission that enabled the United States to join the modern world of terror alongside Iraq, Pakistan, Gaza, Afghanistan, and other centers of suicide bombers, ideological nut-cases, anti-government neo-fascists, and just plain crazies who believe that death is a form of life and a way of life.
Let's make money from this new era. Join the NRA.
Merchants of death throughout the world have no problems supplying their clients with whatever they want in arms and munitions so long as the dollars (and only dollars) are there to pay for them. Terrorists of all stripes, mini-revolutionaries, governmental terrorists ala Mugabe, rapists and land-grabbers, Muslims, Sikhs, past and present Russians, American loonies, Indians and Pakistanis, Phillipinos and Palestinians, Kurds and Turks, and the list goes on and on barely describing who and why they need killing tools and against whom those tools will be used.
The vast land of the United States will become a killing ground in the same way that other sophisticated modern nations will become killing grounds; because the weapons of terror are available and easily obtained. The Supreme Idiot Court of the United States has upheld the right of all citizens to bear arms. What enormous gigantic power lies in the hands of arms manufacturers and merchants to be able to obtain a majority of the justices to twist the clearly stated language of the 2nd Amendment to the United States Constitution that calls for citizens' RIGHT to bear arms in a WELL REGULATED MILITIA.
When sufficient money enters the cabals that hold violent beliefs, the country will recognize the errors of ommission and commission that enabled the United States to join the modern world of terror alongside Iraq, Pakistan, Gaza, Afghanistan, and other centers of suicide bombers, ideological nut-cases, anti-government neo-fascists, and just plain crazies who believe that death is a form of life and a way of life.
Let's make money from this new era. Join the NRA.
Thursday, November 27, 2008
HIS STORY - PUTIN CREATES & DESTROYS THE PAST
The New York Times: November 27, 2008
Nationalism of Putin's Era Veils Sins of Stalin's
That's the headline of the story about how "history" is created. Vladimir Putin, the Dictator of Russia, theoretically the leader of a democracy, is intent on creating the events of the past, today. This former KGB agent, (the Russian secret service under the Stalin dictatorship,) is intent on rewriting the history of Soviet Russia to conform to his idea of what the Russian people and the world SHOULD know about that era. Records of events of that past horror show are locked up now, and will in all likelihood be destroyed so that the new Putin version of what took place will not be subject to verification.
Skeptics of the notion that history is created by power elites, the winners of wars and controllers of information and education, may wish to evaluate the impact of Putin's acts on the truth, the realities, the facts, of what took place in that prior time. They may wish to examine how George W. Bush and Dick Cheney and their minions in the United States have so tightened their control of the evidence of their actions as those actions affected the course of events while they were in power, that Putin and the American power structure of the past eight years may be partners in historic revisions that overlap in time.
Historians, at least those who believe they write history, are forced to create structures from the scraps of evidence they find, much as anthropologists create whole skeletons from single bones.
The sad truth is that children learn about the past what kings and queens want them to learn.
Nationalism of Putin's Era Veils Sins of Stalin's
That's the headline of the story about how "history" is created. Vladimir Putin, the Dictator of Russia, theoretically the leader of a democracy, is intent on creating the events of the past, today. This former KGB agent, (the Russian secret service under the Stalin dictatorship,) is intent on rewriting the history of Soviet Russia to conform to his idea of what the Russian people and the world SHOULD know about that era. Records of events of that past horror show are locked up now, and will in all likelihood be destroyed so that the new Putin version of what took place will not be subject to verification.
Skeptics of the notion that history is created by power elites, the winners of wars and controllers of information and education, may wish to evaluate the impact of Putin's acts on the truth, the realities, the facts, of what took place in that prior time. They may wish to examine how George W. Bush and Dick Cheney and their minions in the United States have so tightened their control of the evidence of their actions as those actions affected the course of events while they were in power, that Putin and the American power structure of the past eight years may be partners in historic revisions that overlap in time.
Historians, at least those who believe they write history, are forced to create structures from the scraps of evidence they find, much as anthropologists create whole skeletons from single bones.
The sad truth is that children learn about the past what kings and queens want them to learn.
Monday, November 17, 2008
TERRORISM AND STATECRAFT - 21st CENTURY
The dividing line between terrorists and statesmen has been eroding over the past few decades, unless the rise of Nazism is included in the definition of terrorism.
Iran, whose political leader, with the acquiescence of its religious - and more powerful leaders - has called for the destruction of another nation, Israel. Iraq's Saddam Hussein attacked neighboring Kuwait in a clear terrorist attempt to gain hegemony over that state. Syria's previous president, Hafiz Assad, killed 10,000 citizens in what can only be described as a terrorist attack. Libya's president Qaddafi sent terrorist minions to place a bomb on board a Pan Am airliner that resulted in the deaths of over two hundred passengers and crew.
Terrorists are supported, trained, and sent on missions by nations. They are not sent out to hold up banks. They are sent to kill innocent civilians in what the statesmen consider an act of retribution, a political act. The New York City World Trade Center twin towers were destroyed by terrorists from Saudi Arabia. It is difficult to believe that this cadre of killers was unknown to the leaders of that country.
Terrorism as statecraft has spread to oppressive regimes and to the regimes' internal opponents as the most effective means of retaining and obtaining power. War craft and statecraft were, and in many countries are, the means of settling conflicting claims to power. The difference between terrorism and war craft is found in the targets of the killing and destruction that takes place. Thus, Saddam Hussein's attack on Kuwait's civilian population might be classified as terrorist until other nations' armies engaged Iraq's armed forces.
The killings of Sunnis by Shiites and vice verse are terrorist, by definition. However, with both religious groups in the Iraqi government, and with the killing of each other by civilian bombers, we see 21st century terrorism as statecraft and statecraft as terrorism. This condition is a harbinger of a new way of electing political leaders and political parties.
President Mugabe of Zimbabwe has shown that the next step in this march to political expression is voting machines that blow up, along with the voter, when the wrong button is pushed.
Iran, whose political leader, with the acquiescence of its religious - and more powerful leaders - has called for the destruction of another nation, Israel. Iraq's Saddam Hussein attacked neighboring Kuwait in a clear terrorist attempt to gain hegemony over that state. Syria's previous president, Hafiz Assad, killed 10,000 citizens in what can only be described as a terrorist attack. Libya's president Qaddafi sent terrorist minions to place a bomb on board a Pan Am airliner that resulted in the deaths of over two hundred passengers and crew.
Terrorists are supported, trained, and sent on missions by nations. They are not sent out to hold up banks. They are sent to kill innocent civilians in what the statesmen consider an act of retribution, a political act. The New York City World Trade Center twin towers were destroyed by terrorists from Saudi Arabia. It is difficult to believe that this cadre of killers was unknown to the leaders of that country.
Terrorism as statecraft has spread to oppressive regimes and to the regimes' internal opponents as the most effective means of retaining and obtaining power. War craft and statecraft were, and in many countries are, the means of settling conflicting claims to power. The difference between terrorism and war craft is found in the targets of the killing and destruction that takes place. Thus, Saddam Hussein's attack on Kuwait's civilian population might be classified as terrorist until other nations' armies engaged Iraq's armed forces.
The killings of Sunnis by Shiites and vice verse are terrorist, by definition. However, with both religious groups in the Iraqi government, and with the killing of each other by civilian bombers, we see 21st century terrorism as statecraft and statecraft as terrorism. This condition is a harbinger of a new way of electing political leaders and political parties.
President Mugabe of Zimbabwe has shown that the next step in this march to political expression is voting machines that blow up, along with the voter, when the wrong button is pushed.
Friday, November 14, 2008
THE ISRAEL PALESTINIAN CONFLICT – Part 2
THE ISRAEL PALESTINIAN CONFLICT – Part 2 - NOVEMBER 2008 & SEARCH FOR COMMON GROUND – Part 2
After evaluating alternative methods for approaching solutions to the conflict, it appears that the bases for thinking, discussing, and arriving at agreements, are so rigid and intractable as to prevent any realistic method from arising to enable resolution of the conflict.
To start with, the Islamic world is intent on wiping out the State of Israel and Israel refuses to cooperate in its extinction. Past attempts to ignore, breach, or bypass this wall have ended in much death and no change in this fundamental and foundational element.
As with most of the conflicts between peoples on the face of the earth, the intractable elements of history, religion, patriotism, geography, love of country, military strategy, wealth and its power, all work against peaceful solutions and accommodations between the parties. Often, within a country, conflicts arise between competing political entities over the degree and nature of concessions to be offered to achieve peace. The more powerful grouping, the wealthy and the ones who benefit most from conflict are the winners and the mass of populations send their sons to war.
The earth has been and is divided and rotates in two orbits; one, the masses, the pawns, and the other, the power elites – the kings and queens - with their knights, rooks, and bishops.
Through the centuries, “conventional” arms have inflicted limited damage on conflicting parties. However, we have entered the age of “non-conventional” warfare. Nagasaki and Hiroshima are the only real examples of the results of such warfare. The pictures are there for all to see but the experiences of that kind of warfare have been hidden from today’s players in both orbits, by intent and by a kind of stupidity that defies explanation. Power elites do not benefit from holocausts.
The United States and Russia have set examples to the world of that stupidity cloaked in a variety of garments that have been woven from the cloth of history, religion, patriotism, and simplistic bravado. The atomic nations and the nations that aspire to join the nuclear club have been dumbed down by the sheer excitement of owning such destructive power.
Until such moment when parts of our world again experience the immense tragedy and sorrow of nuclear holocaust, no progress will be made in mankind’s ability to solve its relational problems and conflicts. Until peoples with burnt out eyes and immolated flesh are shown to monetary and religious fundamentalists, the “decision-making powers,” will there be any possibility for conflict resolution between nations and peoples.
RESPONSES TO THE ABOVE POSTING:
REPLIES
You conclude that it will take a nuclear holocaust to resolve the conflict between Israel and Palestine. I find nothing in your essay that addresses the Israel-Palestine conflict itself, and no constructive suggestions toward any kind of settlement. What is the actual aim of this essay?
Adina
Sorry, Nachum, I don't get it. Are you saying that we are so inured to the nuclear age that we need another city to be annihilated in order to solve some problem, possibly the Islamist/Jewish conflict? I think you are mixing metaphors here.
/Rick
There has not been a weapon invented that humanity did not use - and no horrors have stopped wars.
Yes - western Europe has been at peace these 60 years - I am not knowledgeable enough to know why. perhaps those power elites have not seen any advantage to war - yet. Same goes for North America. Our problem - Ahmedinajad (?) and his ilk do not care about the holocaust they might cause - there are those virgins in heaven and who knows what is needed to bring back their missing messiah/immam (the word I would need has just eluded me). remember - it's the Christians who expect Armaggedon before the second coming.
We were in germany talking to classes as part of Kristalnacht commemorations. A girl asked me if I don't want to live in a safe country (instead of Israel). I said, sure - and then gave her the Zionist spiel. So yes, I am happy for every day without catastrophy - and fear for my kids and theirs, and nothing to be done...
TAMAR
Nach- sounds like you are saying that our only hope is nuclear war? Why bother?
ANNE
YOU WANT FEEDBACK..OK..YOUR WISH IS MY COMMAND.
I READ EVERYTHING TIL I'M RED.WHITE AND BLUE IN THE FACE. SO MUCH FOR PATRIOTISM. YOU PRESENT ALL THE NEGATIVES AND NO SOLUTIONS. WE KNOW ALL THE BAD THINGS BUT WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT THEM. YOU SEEM TO FEEL THERE IS NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT THEM EXCEPT REMIND EVERYONE WHAT THEY ARE AND WHOSE FAULT IT IS. IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY SOLUTIONS I AM SUGGESTING THE ONE THING I CAN NEVER EXPECT FROM MY GOOD FRIEND...GIVE UP!.ENJOY THE BLESSING OF THE NEW ADDITION TO THE CLAN AND HOPE (RATHER THAN PRAY) THAT SOMEONE IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE SOLVES THE PROBLEMS THAT EXIST IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND EVERYWHERE ELSE. HOPE YOUR NEW ADDITION WILL NEVER HAVE TO FACE THE PROBLEMS THAT, IT SEEMS, THE FUTURE HOLDS FOR THE NEXT GENERATIONS. THESE ARE THE TIMES THAT I AM THANKFUL THAT I AM NEARING THE END AND NOT HAVEING TO START AT THE BEGINNING. OLD AGE DOES HAVE ITS ADVANTAGES.
BOB J.
The last entry about how they should forget the past and plan for the future was a memorable idea that will stick in my head, as long as it works.
HARVEY
After evaluating alternative methods for approaching solutions to the conflict, it appears that the bases for thinking, discussing, and arriving at agreements, are so rigid and intractable as to prevent any realistic method from arising to enable resolution of the conflict.
To start with, the Islamic world is intent on wiping out the State of Israel and Israel refuses to cooperate in its extinction. Past attempts to ignore, breach, or bypass this wall have ended in much death and no change in this fundamental and foundational element.
As with most of the conflicts between peoples on the face of the earth, the intractable elements of history, religion, patriotism, geography, love of country, military strategy, wealth and its power, all work against peaceful solutions and accommodations between the parties. Often, within a country, conflicts arise between competing political entities over the degree and nature of concessions to be offered to achieve peace. The more powerful grouping, the wealthy and the ones who benefit most from conflict are the winners and the mass of populations send their sons to war.
The earth has been and is divided and rotates in two orbits; one, the masses, the pawns, and the other, the power elites – the kings and queens - with their knights, rooks, and bishops.
Through the centuries, “conventional” arms have inflicted limited damage on conflicting parties. However, we have entered the age of “non-conventional” warfare. Nagasaki and Hiroshima are the only real examples of the results of such warfare. The pictures are there for all to see but the experiences of that kind of warfare have been hidden from today’s players in both orbits, by intent and by a kind of stupidity that defies explanation. Power elites do not benefit from holocausts.
The United States and Russia have set examples to the world of that stupidity cloaked in a variety of garments that have been woven from the cloth of history, religion, patriotism, and simplistic bravado. The atomic nations and the nations that aspire to join the nuclear club have been dumbed down by the sheer excitement of owning such destructive power.
Until such moment when parts of our world again experience the immense tragedy and sorrow of nuclear holocaust, no progress will be made in mankind’s ability to solve its relational problems and conflicts. Until peoples with burnt out eyes and immolated flesh are shown to monetary and religious fundamentalists, the “decision-making powers,” will there be any possibility for conflict resolution between nations and peoples.
RESPONSES TO THE ABOVE POSTING:
REPLIES
You conclude that it will take a nuclear holocaust to resolve the conflict between Israel and Palestine. I find nothing in your essay that addresses the Israel-Palestine conflict itself, and no constructive suggestions toward any kind of settlement. What is the actual aim of this essay?
Adina
Sorry, Nachum, I don't get it. Are you saying that we are so inured to the nuclear age that we need another city to be annihilated in order to solve some problem, possibly the Islamist/Jewish conflict? I think you are mixing metaphors here.
/Rick
There has not been a weapon invented that humanity did not use - and no horrors have stopped wars.
Yes - western Europe has been at peace these 60 years - I am not knowledgeable enough to know why. perhaps those power elites have not seen any advantage to war - yet. Same goes for North America. Our problem - Ahmedinajad (?) and his ilk do not care about the holocaust they might cause - there are those virgins in heaven and who knows what is needed to bring back their missing messiah/immam (the word I would need has just eluded me). remember - it's the Christians who expect Armaggedon before the second coming.
We were in germany talking to classes as part of Kristalnacht commemorations. A girl asked me if I don't want to live in a safe country (instead of Israel). I said, sure - and then gave her the Zionist spiel. So yes, I am happy for every day without catastrophy - and fear for my kids and theirs, and nothing to be done...
TAMAR
Nach- sounds like you are saying that our only hope is nuclear war? Why bother?
ANNE
YOU WANT FEEDBACK..OK..YOUR WISH IS MY COMMAND.
I READ EVERYTHING TIL I'M RED.WHITE AND BLUE IN THE FACE. SO MUCH FOR PATRIOTISM. YOU PRESENT ALL THE NEGATIVES AND NO SOLUTIONS. WE KNOW ALL THE BAD THINGS BUT WHAT CAN WE DO ABOUT THEM. YOU SEEM TO FEEL THERE IS NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT THEM EXCEPT REMIND EVERYONE WHAT THEY ARE AND WHOSE FAULT IT IS. IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY SOLUTIONS I AM SUGGESTING THE ONE THING I CAN NEVER EXPECT FROM MY GOOD FRIEND...GIVE UP!.ENJOY THE BLESSING OF THE NEW ADDITION TO THE CLAN AND HOPE (RATHER THAN PRAY) THAT SOMEONE IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE SOLVES THE PROBLEMS THAT EXIST IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND EVERYWHERE ELSE. HOPE YOUR NEW ADDITION WILL NEVER HAVE TO FACE THE PROBLEMS THAT, IT SEEMS, THE FUTURE HOLDS FOR THE NEXT GENERATIONS. THESE ARE THE TIMES THAT I AM THANKFUL THAT I AM NEARING THE END AND NOT HAVEING TO START AT THE BEGINNING. OLD AGE DOES HAVE ITS ADVANTAGES.
BOB J.
The last entry about how they should forget the past and plan for the future was a memorable idea that will stick in my head, as long as it works.
HARVEY
PROP 8 - BUILDING BLOCK OF FUNDAMENTALISM
California's Proposition 8, passed by a small majority in the recent election, defines marriage as ONLY between a man and a woman.
The years have shown that the marriage of any two individuals and the way they live their lives together or the way they get a divorce, is independent of law. Prop 8 overthrew a California Supreme Court decision that permitted marriage of any couples requesting the State's license to marry.
Now, as a nation, we are faced with the choice of enshrining this same proposition in the Constitution of the United States.
Unless we recognize this attack on individual rights and freedoms for what it is, we as a nation are doomed to an explosion of reactionary law-making that will bring Americans to live under similar intolerant tenets of religious fundamentalism seen in the Islamic world.
Proposition 8 is similar in kind to the attacks on women's rights now being conducted in courts throughout the land. Citizens running for election to political offices, from town Librarian to Mayor to member of the Board of Education and on up to the President, will declare their desire and willingness to tear down the separation of church and state and make decisions required in their positions that will dictate LEGAL prejudice, isolation, discrimination,
Prop 8 has many faces and many disguises. As our New England forebears stated so eloquently, "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." Unless we are vigilant and act on that vigilance, our liberties will exist only in history books.
The years have shown that the marriage of any two individuals and the way they live their lives together or the way they get a divorce, is independent of law. Prop 8 overthrew a California Supreme Court decision that permitted marriage of any couples requesting the State's license to marry.
Now, as a nation, we are faced with the choice of enshrining this same proposition in the Constitution of the United States.
Unless we recognize this attack on individual rights and freedoms for what it is, we as a nation are doomed to an explosion of reactionary law-making that will bring Americans to live under similar intolerant tenets of religious fundamentalism seen in the Islamic world.
Proposition 8 is similar in kind to the attacks on women's rights now being conducted in courts throughout the land. Citizens running for election to political offices, from town Librarian to Mayor to member of the Board of Education and on up to the President, will declare their desire and willingness to tear down the separation of church and state and make decisions required in their positions that will dictate LEGAL prejudice, isolation, discrimination,
Prop 8 has many faces and many disguises. As our New England forebears stated so eloquently, "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." Unless we are vigilant and act on that vigilance, our liberties will exist only in history books.
Thursday, November 13, 2008
SEARCH FOR COMMON GROUND - PATH TO ??
Palestinians are Arabs who lived in a geographically ill-defined area of Middle East land, the borders of which have changed innumerable times over the centuries. Jews also have lived in that area for thousands of years. With the rise of the Zionist movement in the late eighteen hundreds whose goal is the establishment of a national home for the Jewish people, those Jews are often defined as Zionists, sometimes against their objections to such a non-religious name. Most Palestinians wish that Israel would disappear or be "disappeared." Hence, the Palestinian-Israel conflict.
"SEARCH FOR COMMON GROUND" is the name of an organization seeking to resolve the Palestinian-Israel conflict. Notice the difference between Palestinian, meaning people who live in a geographical area called "Palestine," and Israel, meaning a nation established in 1948 in part of that area. The conflict began in biblical times and continues to the present, having assumed many shapes over the centuries.
Common ground is an expression that generally implies an area of agreement between parties with differing points of view. Searching for that area of agreement and finding it should or may lead to agreement on issues in dispute by holding up the pictures of areas of agreement as guideposts on the way to agreement on those opposing issues, those issues in dispute.
However, when there are no common grounds that relate to the issues in dispute, the search for common ground is a misleading tactic in the way to agreement on issues in dispute. Being friendly with your opponent, a desired condition growing out of common ground, is of no use in the resolution of issues of belief and historical/geographical imperatives. As an example, if one loses a piece of jewelry that is found by another in neutral territory and claimed by the finder as belonging to him, no common ground can resolve the conflict of ownership.
Or, if one believes that a certain rock is holy, no finding of common ground will enable a non-believer to destroy or remove that rock from its location.
Or, if one is brought up to believe that a national territory extends to a certain location and if, after warfare over that territory, a non-national attempts to occupy that territory and claim it under the rules of war, absent some agreement that is based on a fair exchange of territory - patriotism, love of country, and history will simply nullify any change that is not found to be fair.
These are examples where “common ground” leads nowhere. History, religion, geography, patriotism, prior ownership, all nullify the benefits of cordial relations generated by finding common grounds that enable antagonists to discuss their disagreements in an amicable fashion.
The solution to the Palestinian-Israel conflict lies in the parties defining a future without reference to history, geography, religion, patriotism or any unchangeable immutable points of reference. What do the parties to the conflict want for their following generations? Peace, health, education, opportunity, prosperity, equality, and all the happiness that these may provide. Until the definition for the future is agreed upon, no discussion of territory will lead to a solution.
"SEARCH FOR COMMON GROUND" is the name of an organization seeking to resolve the Palestinian-Israel conflict. Notice the difference between Palestinian, meaning people who live in a geographical area called "Palestine," and Israel, meaning a nation established in 1948 in part of that area. The conflict began in biblical times and continues to the present, having assumed many shapes over the centuries.
Common ground is an expression that generally implies an area of agreement between parties with differing points of view. Searching for that area of agreement and finding it should or may lead to agreement on issues in dispute by holding up the pictures of areas of agreement as guideposts on the way to agreement on those opposing issues, those issues in dispute.
However, when there are no common grounds that relate to the issues in dispute, the search for common ground is a misleading tactic in the way to agreement on issues in dispute. Being friendly with your opponent, a desired condition growing out of common ground, is of no use in the resolution of issues of belief and historical/geographical imperatives. As an example, if one loses a piece of jewelry that is found by another in neutral territory and claimed by the finder as belonging to him, no common ground can resolve the conflict of ownership.
Or, if one believes that a certain rock is holy, no finding of common ground will enable a non-believer to destroy or remove that rock from its location.
Or, if one is brought up to believe that a national territory extends to a certain location and if, after warfare over that territory, a non-national attempts to occupy that territory and claim it under the rules of war, absent some agreement that is based on a fair exchange of territory - patriotism, love of country, and history will simply nullify any change that is not found to be fair.
These are examples where “common ground” leads nowhere. History, religion, geography, patriotism, prior ownership, all nullify the benefits of cordial relations generated by finding common grounds that enable antagonists to discuss their disagreements in an amicable fashion.
The solution to the Palestinian-Israel conflict lies in the parties defining a future without reference to history, geography, religion, patriotism or any unchangeable immutable points of reference. What do the parties to the conflict want for their following generations? Peace, health, education, opportunity, prosperity, equality, and all the happiness that these may provide. Until the definition for the future is agreed upon, no discussion of territory will lead to a solution.
Friday, November 7, 2008
HISTORY'S GOLDEN RULE
What is History's Golden Rule?"
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Not quite.
Do unto others. Closer.
He who has the gold makes the rules. Much closer.
History's "Golden Rule" is this, "He who writes the history has the gold."
And the corollary to the rule is that the winner is the one with the gold.
The writers of history in the first instance, the survivors of events, the victors in the field, the kings and queens and dictators and presidents, and all the leaders of nations, empires, tribes, and religions, and the puppeteers behind the curtains - the true powers, "the powers behind the thrones," who indeed control the writers of the first instance, are the power elites, the ones who have the gold. They are NOT historians. They are story tellers.
At some point in time, the "historical" stories begin to change, dependent on two conditions; independence and availability of evidence. After the first and second and possibly the third generation of winners have passed away, at times, a different group appears, removed from the influence of power, who write a different kind of history. It is history that more closely identifies the facts of historical events after research of available evidence.
Winners and losers switch places, evidence is often intentionally destroyed, and protagonists and antagonists die with historically important secrets buried with them. In addition, an influence on the veracity of historical documentation continues in its power to affect the writing of history, namely religious institutions that thrive regardless of power elites' demise.
Religious institutions provide the clearest proof of the nature of history's Golden Rule. Under the continuous mendacious claim of poverty, wealth and its power continue being amassed by every religious establishment concocted by the mind of man. Since the first cuneiform and wall paintings appeared, these establishments, in partnership with ever-changing power elites, write the histories. It is a rare history that is a true history that enters the doors of academe for educational usage. The writers of true histories and their books are relegated to the archives from which future historians may pull out a bone from the grave of buried truth.
Thus the cycle of historical adumbration continues, giving unto Mamon what is Mamon's, with false disinterest.
Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Not quite.
Do unto others. Closer.
He who has the gold makes the rules. Much closer.
History's "Golden Rule" is this, "He who writes the history has the gold."
And the corollary to the rule is that the winner is the one with the gold.
The writers of history in the first instance, the survivors of events, the victors in the field, the kings and queens and dictators and presidents, and all the leaders of nations, empires, tribes, and religions, and the puppeteers behind the curtains - the true powers, "the powers behind the thrones," who indeed control the writers of the first instance, are the power elites, the ones who have the gold. They are NOT historians. They are story tellers.
At some point in time, the "historical" stories begin to change, dependent on two conditions; independence and availability of evidence. After the first and second and possibly the third generation of winners have passed away, at times, a different group appears, removed from the influence of power, who write a different kind of history. It is history that more closely identifies the facts of historical events after research of available evidence.
Winners and losers switch places, evidence is often intentionally destroyed, and protagonists and antagonists die with historically important secrets buried with them. In addition, an influence on the veracity of historical documentation continues in its power to affect the writing of history, namely religious institutions that thrive regardless of power elites' demise.
Religious institutions provide the clearest proof of the nature of history's Golden Rule. Under the continuous mendacious claim of poverty, wealth and its power continue being amassed by every religious establishment concocted by the mind of man. Since the first cuneiform and wall paintings appeared, these establishments, in partnership with ever-changing power elites, write the histories. It is a rare history that is a true history that enters the doors of academe for educational usage. The writers of true histories and their books are relegated to the archives from which future historians may pull out a bone from the grave of buried truth.
Thus the cycle of historical adumbration continues, giving unto Mamon what is Mamon's, with false disinterest.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
THE ISRAEL PALESTINIAN CONFLICT - NOVEMBER 2008
Israel was established as a nation in 1948. The new nation was immediately attacked by five neighboring Arab armies. The Arab world with two exceptions, is still officially at war with Israel. Now, sixty years later, the Arabs still dream of pushing Israel into the sea. In addition, they have been joined by Iran in that crusade, though it states that it is not an Arab nation, whose leader has called for the annihilation of Israel.
The peoples of the Arab world fight and kill each other and anyone else that their political and religious leaders define as enemies. Tribal mores prevail to a substantial extent in the twenty countries of the Arab world. Not a single Arab country is a democracy though sham voting takes place under the guns of thedictatorships and various armed coalitions. Dictatorial religious leaders also determine the political directions these countries take.
In many ways, Arab populations live in the eighteenth century, (or even earlier in some cases,) culturally and economically and in their systems of government and what their governments have not provided such as education, health care, political and gender emancipation, and other standard protections and benefits that modern times have brought the western world. Their power, water, transportation, and waste disposal infrastructures, primitive to begin with, are decrepit with few exceptions. However, all of these countries expend enormous amounts of monetary and human capital on their military capability.
Five wars and sixty years have come and gone and modern democratic Israel is now in the process of electing a new government. The central issue in the election is who will be better able to deal with this ongoing conflict. Over these past years, the country has become a military, an economic, and an intellectual powerhouse that is comparable to the advanced western nations in its way of life, its economy, and in its democratic political structure.
Defining the difference between the parties vying for votes in this upcoming election can be simplified by one key philosophical difference tha has enormous ramifications for Israel's future; Talkers and Preparers.
The Talkers believe that war can be averted by talking and the Preparers of military power believe that their efforts will prevent war.
The Talkers will probably lose the election because the Preparers are backed by huge amounts of money in anticipation of the huge amounts of money to be made in the event of war. And sadly, because of the necessity to expend huge amounts of money to bribe the religious parties into joining the winning coalition and the reluctance and inability of the Talkers to expend such money, the Preparers will win.
The peoples of the Arab world fight and kill each other and anyone else that their political and religious leaders define as enemies. Tribal mores prevail to a substantial extent in the twenty countries of the Arab world. Not a single Arab country is a democracy though sham voting takes place under the guns of thedictatorships and various armed coalitions. Dictatorial religious leaders also determine the political directions these countries take.
In many ways, Arab populations live in the eighteenth century, (or even earlier in some cases,) culturally and economically and in their systems of government and what their governments have not provided such as education, health care, political and gender emancipation, and other standard protections and benefits that modern times have brought the western world. Their power, water, transportation, and waste disposal infrastructures, primitive to begin with, are decrepit with few exceptions. However, all of these countries expend enormous amounts of monetary and human capital on their military capability.
Five wars and sixty years have come and gone and modern democratic Israel is now in the process of electing a new government. The central issue in the election is who will be better able to deal with this ongoing conflict. Over these past years, the country has become a military, an economic, and an intellectual powerhouse that is comparable to the advanced western nations in its way of life, its economy, and in its democratic political structure.
Defining the difference between the parties vying for votes in this upcoming election can be simplified by one key philosophical difference tha has enormous ramifications for Israel's future; Talkers and Preparers.
The Talkers believe that war can be averted by talking and the Preparers of military power believe that their efforts will prevent war.
The Talkers will probably lose the election because the Preparers are backed by huge amounts of money in anticipation of the huge amounts of money to be made in the event of war. And sadly, because of the necessity to expend huge amounts of money to bribe the religious parties into joining the winning coalition and the reluctance and inability of the Talkers to expend such money, the Preparers will win.
AMERICA IN IRAQ - A "NO WIN" WAR
If there is a "No Win" situation in war, it occurs when one warring party lives in the war zone and has nothing to lose but lives and it's a "no choice war," and the other warring party is an outsider sticking its nose in where it doesn't belong and by its presence, forces the natives to fight.
The United States initiated and fought such a war in Viet Nam. In the 20th century, wars of independence by "colonies" were such wars. Think, "Algeria and France," and other national wars of independence as examples. So long as foreign troops occupy land held dear by citizens, there will be never ending conflict. The United States, undeterred by its Viet Nam experience and in the unsubstantiated belief that it "paid" to take over Iraq's oil fields, created a causus belli out of whole cloth, sold it to the American people and a small number of other nation confederates, and marched into Iraq as into quick sand.
Now, in November of 2008, that war is being fought on the electoral turf of America. John McCain pounds his campaign lectern and states that if Barack Obama is elected president, the United States will lose the war in Iraq, and that he alone knows how to win that war. Obama's retort hits the easy mark by asking where has McCain been with this profound knowledge for the past five years and why did he not share his knowledge with his president.
Obviously, there is no possible victory in such a war as this quagmire. It is a classic "No Win" war that will serve West Point instructors well in coming years as the paradigm of a war that should never be fought by the United States on foreign soil. The Iraq war will serve to teach strategy and tactics for a defensive war should America ever be attacked by an invading force - an unlikely scenario in the foreseeable future.
Extrication is the word and the goal for the next president. Extrication of all foreign forces now in Iraq who went there as allies of the United States.
American presence in Iraq is based on falsehoods perpetrated by the leaders of the country. The nefarious and illegal actions of president George W. Bush and vice-president Richard Cheney should lead to immediate imprisonment, trial, and guilty verdict, and a death penalty for their murders of American soldiers and the murders of all the dead of Iraq.
The United States initiated and fought such a war in Viet Nam. In the 20th century, wars of independence by "colonies" were such wars. Think, "Algeria and France," and other national wars of independence as examples. So long as foreign troops occupy land held dear by citizens, there will be never ending conflict. The United States, undeterred by its Viet Nam experience and in the unsubstantiated belief that it "paid" to take over Iraq's oil fields, created a causus belli out of whole cloth, sold it to the American people and a small number of other nation confederates, and marched into Iraq as into quick sand.
Now, in November of 2008, that war is being fought on the electoral turf of America. John McCain pounds his campaign lectern and states that if Barack Obama is elected president, the United States will lose the war in Iraq, and that he alone knows how to win that war. Obama's retort hits the easy mark by asking where has McCain been with this profound knowledge for the past five years and why did he not share his knowledge with his president.
Obviously, there is no possible victory in such a war as this quagmire. It is a classic "No Win" war that will serve West Point instructors well in coming years as the paradigm of a war that should never be fought by the United States on foreign soil. The Iraq war will serve to teach strategy and tactics for a defensive war should America ever be attacked by an invading force - an unlikely scenario in the foreseeable future.
Extrication is the word and the goal for the next president. Extrication of all foreign forces now in Iraq who went there as allies of the United States.
American presence in Iraq is based on falsehoods perpetrated by the leaders of the country. The nefarious and illegal actions of president George W. Bush and vice-president Richard Cheney should lead to immediate imprisonment, trial, and guilty verdict, and a death penalty for their murders of American soldiers and the murders of all the dead of Iraq.
TALKING WITH THE ENEMY vs. WHAT?
History may teach the leaders of nations that being a "winner" in a war means determining future relations with the "loser." But wars have neither winners nor losers; that the fact of going to war means that everyone loses except the people who make money from war. Even the winners of territory are hard put to declare themselves winners unless that territory historically belonged to the winners. Death and destruction of property, including war materiel, makes populations losers by deprivation of the needs of life and the destruction of the quality of life.
So, given that wars are always between losers regardless of who gives up the fight and who is declared "winner," how can wars be averted? First, by insulating conflicts from acquisition-of-wealth influence and second, by the disputing parties talking with each other even when wealth is at stake.
All wars have an economic base. No war is ever fought if nothing of value is at stake. History and religion provide the fastest and surest bases for war. Possession of land and natural resources, slaves, populations, and religious adherents and religious space, access to ports, trade routes, and the means of production of wealth, and, believe it or not, for the destruction of wealth, are all good reasons for going to war.
However, populations are persuaded to march off to war for patriotic and religious reasons, for reasons of perceived injustice or for the security of their nations. Whatever mechanism is used to persuade, the underlying motivation for the war propaganda remains economic.
So how can talking cure the lust for wealth in a particular conflict situation? First and foremost, by removing wealth production from the causus beli. Second, by talking with the "enemy." Only then, is there a real possibility for arriving at solutions to conflicts between nations and ethnic groups. And so long as talking goes on, war goes off.
So, given that wars are always between losers regardless of who gives up the fight and who is declared "winner," how can wars be averted? First, by insulating conflicts from acquisition-of-wealth influence and second, by the disputing parties talking with each other even when wealth is at stake.
All wars have an economic base. No war is ever fought if nothing of value is at stake. History and religion provide the fastest and surest bases for war. Possession of land and natural resources, slaves, populations, and religious adherents and religious space, access to ports, trade routes, and the means of production of wealth, and, believe it or not, for the destruction of wealth, are all good reasons for going to war.
However, populations are persuaded to march off to war for patriotic and religious reasons, for reasons of perceived injustice or for the security of their nations. Whatever mechanism is used to persuade, the underlying motivation for the war propaganda remains economic.
So how can talking cure the lust for wealth in a particular conflict situation? First and foremost, by removing wealth production from the causus beli. Second, by talking with the "enemy." Only then, is there a real possibility for arriving at solutions to conflicts between nations and ethnic groups. And so long as talking goes on, war goes off.
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA - NOVEMBER 4, 2008
Americans have chosen for their president at this historical moment a second Abraham Lincoln.
Barack Obama has arrived at the helm of the ship of state at a time of turmoil and terror. How fortuitous that a man of his stature and strength came forth from Illinois to assume the burdens of leadership at a time when the ship was foundering in the tempestuous storms brought on by his predecessor in the White House.
Amid the challenges of fear and hunger and the known horror that an eruption in our atomic age could bring, Barack Obama has stepped out to lead our country and to uplift our nation to a potential new age of honesty and openness in government, common sense in the roles of legislators and their constituents, intelligence and awareness of the nature of our times in judges' applications of the laws of our land, fairness in taxation and the distribution of the burdens of caring for our citizens, and dedication to a better future for the children of the world. These are changes that he has promised.
And he will bring his visions to his listeners with veracity and linguistic virtuosity, a happy change among the many of which he spoke in the months before his election.
With the same grace he has shown to the losers in his victory, we, the people who chose him to be our leader, must now show the patience and cooperation that he will need in the coming months and years of his presidency, to chart a new course for the nation and, in its dealings with the nations of the world. with wisdom, so that those who follow him in his role as captain will find the way to a happier, more equitable, world.
Barack Obama has arrived at the helm of the ship of state at a time of turmoil and terror. How fortuitous that a man of his stature and strength came forth from Illinois to assume the burdens of leadership at a time when the ship was foundering in the tempestuous storms brought on by his predecessor in the White House.
Amid the challenges of fear and hunger and the known horror that an eruption in our atomic age could bring, Barack Obama has stepped out to lead our country and to uplift our nation to a potential new age of honesty and openness in government, common sense in the roles of legislators and their constituents, intelligence and awareness of the nature of our times in judges' applications of the laws of our land, fairness in taxation and the distribution of the burdens of caring for our citizens, and dedication to a better future for the children of the world. These are changes that he has promised.
And he will bring his visions to his listeners with veracity and linguistic virtuosity, a happy change among the many of which he spoke in the months before his election.
With the same grace he has shown to the losers in his victory, we, the people who chose him to be our leader, must now show the patience and cooperation that he will need in the coming months and years of his presidency, to chart a new course for the nation and, in its dealings with the nations of the world. with wisdom, so that those who follow him in his role as captain will find the way to a happier, more equitable, world.
Saturday, November 1, 2008
2008 PRE-ELECTION THOUGHTS - WHAT'S AT STAKE
It's Friday night, October 31st, 2008. November 4th is Election Day for president and an enormous variety and number of political offices and propositions on which "The People" will vote.
The United States of America is in critical condition. It is suffering from so many unaccustomed ills. The economy is in deep trouble. We are at war in too many places. Our health care and education systems are inadequate to meet the challenges they face daily. Our country's position is the world has been so abased and we are held in such low esteem that the beacon to the world we were once has been extinguished. Our courts' higher levels have been loaded with judges litmus-test-chosen by their history on the bench of decision making restricted to and based on documents from our county's founding condition over two hundred years ago, and on a religious ethic that defies one of the foundation blocks of our democracy, the separation of church and state. Our country stands alone in its insistence on using the death penalty to reduce crime while at the same time our jails are overfilled with criminals, petty and monstrous, for whom there is no future but crime because of the "No coddling with education" policies of our state/police union controlled systems. And there are many more problems that can be listed to show that the land of the free and the home of the brave has been converted to the land of the enslaved and the home of the weak led by the power elite of the country in union with the political system that has passed laws allowing grand theft and rewarding the most successful thieves with even greater power to elevate their thievery to a level unsurpassed in the history of the nation. And the American People have been duped into believing that to have it any other way means "Liberalism" and "Socialism" and heaven forfend that the one percent of the power elite that holds 99 percent of the country's wealth be disabused of their belief that the fascistic economy they control is God's gift to them and them alone.
What's at stake is the future of the United States, its people, and the powerful of the free world descending into savage brutality leading an economic charge against ALL of the world's people. America turned into a white Darfur and Somalia in action under the banners of Syria, Iran, and North Korea, the axis of evil, the mirror of America that has become the evil renegade state leading civilization down to savagery.
Can Barack Obama turn around this headlong rush by these powerful forces? Half the people of the United States are against him. The wealthy and the poor uneducated indoctrinated masses who think he's a "socialist." Ha, ha. He will be elected president and shot when he seems to be successful. America is the leader of the free world in assassinating its leaders, did you know that?
The United States of America is in critical condition. It is suffering from so many unaccustomed ills. The economy is in deep trouble. We are at war in too many places. Our health care and education systems are inadequate to meet the challenges they face daily. Our country's position is the world has been so abased and we are held in such low esteem that the beacon to the world we were once has been extinguished. Our courts' higher levels have been loaded with judges litmus-test-chosen by their history on the bench of decision making restricted to and based on documents from our county's founding condition over two hundred years ago, and on a religious ethic that defies one of the foundation blocks of our democracy, the separation of church and state. Our country stands alone in its insistence on using the death penalty to reduce crime while at the same time our jails are overfilled with criminals, petty and monstrous, for whom there is no future but crime because of the "No coddling with education" policies of our state/police union controlled systems. And there are many more problems that can be listed to show that the land of the free and the home of the brave has been converted to the land of the enslaved and the home of the weak led by the power elite of the country in union with the political system that has passed laws allowing grand theft and rewarding the most successful thieves with even greater power to elevate their thievery to a level unsurpassed in the history of the nation. And the American People have been duped into believing that to have it any other way means "Liberalism" and "Socialism" and heaven forfend that the one percent of the power elite that holds 99 percent of the country's wealth be disabused of their belief that the fascistic economy they control is God's gift to them and them alone.
What's at stake is the future of the United States, its people, and the powerful of the free world descending into savage brutality leading an economic charge against ALL of the world's people. America turned into a white Darfur and Somalia in action under the banners of Syria, Iran, and North Korea, the axis of evil, the mirror of America that has become the evil renegade state leading civilization down to savagery.
Can Barack Obama turn around this headlong rush by these powerful forces? Half the people of the United States are against him. The wealthy and the poor uneducated indoctrinated masses who think he's a "socialist." Ha, ha. He will be elected president and shot when he seems to be successful. America is the leader of the free world in assassinating its leaders, did you know that?
Sunday, October 26, 2008
EDUCATION vs. INDOCTRINATION - PROP. 8
To educate means: 1. to provide schooling, 2. to develop mentally or morally, esp. by instruction. A synonym is “to teach.” Our Founding Fathers recognized the importance of education to preserve the democratic nature of our country.
To indoctrinate means: 1. to instruct, especially in fundamentals or rudiments: Teach, 2. to imbue with a usually partisan or sectarian opinion, point of view, or principle. Nazi Germany indoctrinated its people to further the cause (or curse) of Nazism through militarism, hatred of the “other,” and strict conformity to the dictates of its Dictator, Adolph Hitler.
In May of 2008, the California Supreme Court struck down a 2000 law that restricted same sex couples from marriage denying to them rights under the equal protection clause of the California Constitution that is similar to the equal protection clause in the United States Constitution.
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SECTION 1. All people are by nature free and independent and have
inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and
liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing
and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.
Proposition 8 amends the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry within the state. It defines marriage as only between one man and one
woman.
Proposition 8 would deny constitutional rights and protections to homosexuals. The selling point of those who propose and sanction this proposition is that their children may be educated to the fact that homosexuals have the same rights as heterosexuals.
And for the citizens of our state who support the proposition in the wildly uneducated but strongly indoctrinated belief that homosexuality can be taught to their children in school and by use of books about gay marriage, they believe passing such an amendment will protect their children from the “evils” of education and provide them rather with the benefits of indoctrination to prejudice and intolerance, regardless of the facts of life.
Also, in the sad and harmful belief that they are acting morally by supporting Proposition 8, they are sadly harming a significant number of people in the State of California by their immoral act.
Vote NO on proposition 8!
To indoctrinate means: 1. to instruct, especially in fundamentals or rudiments: Teach, 2. to imbue with a usually partisan or sectarian opinion, point of view, or principle. Nazi Germany indoctrinated its people to further the cause (or curse) of Nazism through militarism, hatred of the “other,” and strict conformity to the dictates of its Dictator, Adolph Hitler.
In May of 2008, the California Supreme Court struck down a 2000 law that restricted same sex couples from marriage denying to them rights under the equal protection clause of the California Constitution that is similar to the equal protection clause in the United States Constitution.
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 1 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS
SECTION 1. All people are by nature free and independent and have
inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and
liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing
and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.
Proposition 8 amends the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry within the state. It defines marriage as only between one man and one
woman.
Proposition 8 would deny constitutional rights and protections to homosexuals. The selling point of those who propose and sanction this proposition is that their children may be educated to the fact that homosexuals have the same rights as heterosexuals.
And for the citizens of our state who support the proposition in the wildly uneducated but strongly indoctrinated belief that homosexuality can be taught to their children in school and by use of books about gay marriage, they believe passing such an amendment will protect their children from the “evils” of education and provide them rather with the benefits of indoctrination to prejudice and intolerance, regardless of the facts of life.
Also, in the sad and harmful belief that they are acting morally by supporting Proposition 8, they are sadly harming a significant number of people in the State of California by their immoral act.
Vote NO on proposition 8!
Friday, October 24, 2008
REDUCE HEALTH CARE COSTS THE EASY WAY
Jesus, where are you when we need you?
The cost of health care in the United States is twice as much per capita as the cost in any other westernized country in the world. The quality of health care ranks 24th in quality and availability when compared with those other countries. This amazing state of affairs has brought tragedy to many Americans and shock, dismay, and poor health care to a large number of insured people, mostly the working lower and middle classes. In addition, because of the high cost of health care insurance, many Americans are forced into frightening situation of not being able to obtain any health care outside of government or charitable offerings.
The reason for this situation is that a substantial amount of money that goes into the health care system, goes to companies that do not deliver any form of health care, namely, the insurance companies. Most of that money goes into profits, executive officer compensation at extremely high levels, and into the reserve pot of money from which actual payment for delivery of health care is drawn.
That "pot of money" is invested by the insurance companies for profit making purposes and that profit does not get injected back into the pot but instead goes into the coffers of the insurance companies for their own uses, namely, distribution of dividends to shareholders.
The easy way to reduce heath care costs is to remove all insurance companies from the health care field. The only costs that will continue are the costs of clerical workers (who are trained to deny health care to insureds under an enormous variety of pretexts) and other necessary costs such as office supplies, rent, and usual and customary costs of any legitimate business.
Then the "pot of money" can be invested in the same way the insurance companies invest it and the profits returned for delivery of health care.
This is comparable to Jesus chasing money-lenders from the temple.
The cost of health care in the United States is twice as much per capita as the cost in any other westernized country in the world. The quality of health care ranks 24th in quality and availability when compared with those other countries. This amazing state of affairs has brought tragedy to many Americans and shock, dismay, and poor health care to a large number of insured people, mostly the working lower and middle classes. In addition, because of the high cost of health care insurance, many Americans are forced into frightening situation of not being able to obtain any health care outside of government or charitable offerings.
The reason for this situation is that a substantial amount of money that goes into the health care system, goes to companies that do not deliver any form of health care, namely, the insurance companies. Most of that money goes into profits, executive officer compensation at extremely high levels, and into the reserve pot of money from which actual payment for delivery of health care is drawn.
That "pot of money" is invested by the insurance companies for profit making purposes and that profit does not get injected back into the pot but instead goes into the coffers of the insurance companies for their own uses, namely, distribution of dividends to shareholders.
The easy way to reduce heath care costs is to remove all insurance companies from the health care field. The only costs that will continue are the costs of clerical workers (who are trained to deny health care to insureds under an enormous variety of pretexts) and other necessary costs such as office supplies, rent, and usual and customary costs of any legitimate business.
Then the "pot of money" can be invested in the same way the insurance companies invest it and the profits returned for delivery of health care.
This is comparable to Jesus chasing money-lenders from the temple.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
AMENDMENTS FOR ALL AMERICANS
The County Clerk gets anywhere from $10 to $25 to issue a state approved marriage license. Pastor Priest Mullah gets as much as possible to guarantee God approved Holy Matrimony. RELIGION HAS INFILTRATED GOVERNMENT - NO? Fortunately, the population has a choice about most aspects of marriage.
You are not allowed to masturbate. Black and white may not marry. You can be arrested and fined for having or giving oral sex. No matter how lonely a cowboy is, he may not have sex with a cow. It’s OK for a teacher to talk about war and killing and bloodshed to the kids in her class. It should be a federal offense to say that two women or two men can get married.
I would like to see constitutional amendments for some very important values in my eyes. Making dictionary definitions into law or changing dictionary definitions into law, does not get me excited. Like “Marriage must be between a man and a woman,” does not strike me as warranting a change to the foundational laws of the United States. Now, if it were to be changed to, “Marriage must be between a man and a woman of the same color,” that would get me excited. Or, “Masturbation, oral sex, and bestial sodomy, not leading to human conception, are against the interests of the United States,” would be a good constitutional amendment. Or how about,”Showing pictures of war and bloodshed on television is OK, but showing a bare breast, by shocking the under-eighteen year old population, is forbidden.” I know that Pastor Priest Mullah would like such constitutional amendments.
How about a constitutional amendment that states, “No person in the United States may be denied health care due to “Insufficient Funds.” Or, “No establishment shall make a profit by controlling the distribution of health care if that establishment does not provide health care.”
How about, “There shall be a single national standard for driver education and testing in the United States.”
I like amendments that are not faith-based and that have wide beneficial impact on the people of the United States. How do you feel about that?
You are not allowed to masturbate. Black and white may not marry. You can be arrested and fined for having or giving oral sex. No matter how lonely a cowboy is, he may not have sex with a cow. It’s OK for a teacher to talk about war and killing and bloodshed to the kids in her class. It should be a federal offense to say that two women or two men can get married.
I would like to see constitutional amendments for some very important values in my eyes. Making dictionary definitions into law or changing dictionary definitions into law, does not get me excited. Like “Marriage must be between a man and a woman,” does not strike me as warranting a change to the foundational laws of the United States. Now, if it were to be changed to, “Marriage must be between a man and a woman of the same color,” that would get me excited. Or, “Masturbation, oral sex, and bestial sodomy, not leading to human conception, are against the interests of the United States,” would be a good constitutional amendment. Or how about,”Showing pictures of war and bloodshed on television is OK, but showing a bare breast, by shocking the under-eighteen year old population, is forbidden.” I know that Pastor Priest Mullah would like such constitutional amendments.
How about a constitutional amendment that states, “No person in the United States may be denied health care due to “Insufficient Funds.” Or, “No establishment shall make a profit by controlling the distribution of health care if that establishment does not provide health care.”
How about, “There shall be a single national standard for driver education and testing in the United States.”
I like amendments that are not faith-based and that have wide beneficial impact on the people of the United States. How do you feel about that?
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
BELIEF, TRUTH, AND REALITY
Belief requires no proof of any kind. Reality requires proof.
There is a real reality and a fake - or many fake - realities. Reality is what is. Proof of reality requires acceptance of scientific method. First, there is a theory. Then there is the gathering of data and information. Then, if theory and data agree, you have a fact. That is reality.
Creating fake reality is like creating magic. You convince the viewer that what he sees is real. The more realistic it looks or the harder it is to see the mechanisms whereby the magic is performed, the closer you get to fake reality. You do not prove that magic is real or reality. Watching it sends the viewer away with the question, "How did he do it?"
If you do not agree with this analysis, please tell me. If you agree with this analysis, I'll go to a couple of the fake realities of the day and show you how the magic was performed.
BTW, I am not trying to prove or disprove the existence of God. But I truly believe that God is not real nor a reality. He is a fake reality conjured up for good and evil by manipulators of mankind for good and nefarious ends.
Truth is what you believe to be true. Figure that one out.
There is a real reality and a fake - or many fake - realities. Reality is what is. Proof of reality requires acceptance of scientific method. First, there is a theory. Then there is the gathering of data and information. Then, if theory and data agree, you have a fact. That is reality.
Creating fake reality is like creating magic. You convince the viewer that what he sees is real. The more realistic it looks or the harder it is to see the mechanisms whereby the magic is performed, the closer you get to fake reality. You do not prove that magic is real or reality. Watching it sends the viewer away with the question, "How did he do it?"
If you do not agree with this analysis, please tell me. If you agree with this analysis, I'll go to a couple of the fake realities of the day and show you how the magic was performed.
BTW, I am not trying to prove or disprove the existence of God. But I truly believe that God is not real nor a reality. He is a fake reality conjured up for good and evil by manipulators of mankind for good and nefarious ends.
Truth is what you believe to be true. Figure that one out.
Monday, October 20, 2008
MARRIAGE IS A CONTRACT BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE
Marriage is a contract, generally between two people of the opposite sex, the same religious persuasion, the male being the elder and larger of the couple, the same ethnic background and the same color. But that is only “generally,” and it is generally the situation in the United States. IT COULD BE VERY DIFFERENT!
In other countries, other restrictions or conditions “generally” apply, such as, payment of money, goods, or livestock by one party or the party’s family to the other party or party’s family, or permission by one of the party’s fathers or parents for a marriage to take place after investigation into various requirements or prohibitions such as class, tribal affiliation, relative wealth, or other conditions common to the culture of the marrying people. When all the issues are settled, as in civil contract law that requires an Offer, an Acceptance, and Consideration, that is, an exchange of something of value between the parties, the contract is then affirmed.
Religious officialdom has imposed rules and regulations on marriage that are as varied as the religions themselves and the representatives of those religions who have been given the right by a higher-up to pronounce the marriages “OK.” All religions call for their particular God to bless the contract and make it holy, or whatever “holy” means to them. But contracts are between people, and judging from the rate of divorce, and despite the “holy matrimony,” contracts can be broken – and sometimes should be broken.
The United States, by virtue of its laws, its diversity, and the intelligence and way of life of the American people, has legally done away with such conditions and requirements. In most marriage license-providing government offices, the only requirement is a blood test assuring the couple and the state that neither of them have a sexually transmitted disease, presumably for the health and safety of each member of the couple and their potential offspring. With license in hand, the couple is married in the eyes of the law. But they must be of the opposite sex except in three states, where a couple can be of the same sex and obtain a marriage license.
What the Framers of the constitution of the United States put asunder, Church and State, God has joined together. Joan of Arc can now be burned at the stake and the Spanish Inquisition’s Torquemada can pull people apart on the wheel because they are destroying the sanctity of the state’s Gods. The religionists of America have united to assure that only THEIR Gods can determine the validity of the contract between two people who love, honor, and cherish each other until death do they part.
California’s passage of Proposition 8 will prohibit the state from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. And America moves a little closer to its own destruction as a free country.
In other countries, other restrictions or conditions “generally” apply, such as, payment of money, goods, or livestock by one party or the party’s family to the other party or party’s family, or permission by one of the party’s fathers or parents for a marriage to take place after investigation into various requirements or prohibitions such as class, tribal affiliation, relative wealth, or other conditions common to the culture of the marrying people. When all the issues are settled, as in civil contract law that requires an Offer, an Acceptance, and Consideration, that is, an exchange of something of value between the parties, the contract is then affirmed.
Religious officialdom has imposed rules and regulations on marriage that are as varied as the religions themselves and the representatives of those religions who have been given the right by a higher-up to pronounce the marriages “OK.” All religions call for their particular God to bless the contract and make it holy, or whatever “holy” means to them. But contracts are between people, and judging from the rate of divorce, and despite the “holy matrimony,” contracts can be broken – and sometimes should be broken.
The United States, by virtue of its laws, its diversity, and the intelligence and way of life of the American people, has legally done away with such conditions and requirements. In most marriage license-providing government offices, the only requirement is a blood test assuring the couple and the state that neither of them have a sexually transmitted disease, presumably for the health and safety of each member of the couple and their potential offspring. With license in hand, the couple is married in the eyes of the law. But they must be of the opposite sex except in three states, where a couple can be of the same sex and obtain a marriage license.
What the Framers of the constitution of the United States put asunder, Church and State, God has joined together. Joan of Arc can now be burned at the stake and the Spanish Inquisition’s Torquemada can pull people apart on the wheel because they are destroying the sanctity of the state’s Gods. The religionists of America have united to assure that only THEIR Gods can determine the validity of the contract between two people who love, honor, and cherish each other until death do they part.
California’s passage of Proposition 8 will prohibit the state from issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples. And America moves a little closer to its own destruction as a free country.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
ORGANIZED CRIME
The American people have been subjected to theft, rape, and murder by extraordinarily successful gangsters in very expensive suits smoking very expensive cigars living in very expensive mansions. How? By theft of savings and retirement plans’ investments; rape of unwitting home-owners being screwed out of their deposits and the accumulated principals paid by them, however small or screwed out of health care by the "health coverage" crowd; and murder of jobs and murder of the futures of the masses of unemployed and murder of their children’s futures. That’s how!
This criminal activity was exponentially enhanced by the large number of mobs in cahoots with each other to perpetrate their crimes. The “mobs” were not Mafia or Columbian drug dealers. They were – and are – the bankers, the stock brokers, the insurance companies, the real estate conglomerates, and other entities that controlled, and still control, the amassed savings of millions of the lower and middle classes, and a small portion of the upper class of Americans. And, they were and currently are, aided and abetted in their criminal activity by lawless lawmakers in the three branches of government of the United States; the “de-regulators.”
The so-called “bailout” of these criminals and their companies is simply the further raiding of taxpayer dollars to assure the survival of this systematic pillaging and its morphing into a new and perhaps less obvious deadly form.
Short of a revolution, a legal armed rebellion against the wealthy perpetrators and their replacement by a strictly imposed law-and-order anti-capitalist culture of humanist ethical leaders, there is simply no way to overcome the power elite who have conducted this organized crime wave against the American people. These criminals belong in jail as do all members of organized crime - policed by ethical guardians of ethical laws, and not by their criminal pals.
This criminal activity was exponentially enhanced by the large number of mobs in cahoots with each other to perpetrate their crimes. The “mobs” were not Mafia or Columbian drug dealers. They were – and are – the bankers, the stock brokers, the insurance companies, the real estate conglomerates, and other entities that controlled, and still control, the amassed savings of millions of the lower and middle classes, and a small portion of the upper class of Americans. And, they were and currently are, aided and abetted in their criminal activity by lawless lawmakers in the three branches of government of the United States; the “de-regulators.”
The so-called “bailout” of these criminals and their companies is simply the further raiding of taxpayer dollars to assure the survival of this systematic pillaging and its morphing into a new and perhaps less obvious deadly form.
Short of a revolution, a legal armed rebellion against the wealthy perpetrators and their replacement by a strictly imposed law-and-order anti-capitalist culture of humanist ethical leaders, there is simply no way to overcome the power elite who have conducted this organized crime wave against the American people. These criminals belong in jail as do all members of organized crime - policed by ethical guardians of ethical laws, and not by their criminal pals.
Friday, October 17, 2008
EXPLAINING OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM
A little boy goes to his dad and asks, 'What is Politics?'
Dad says, 'Well son, let me try to explain it this way:
I am the head of the family, so call me The President.
Your mother is the administrator of the money, so we call her the Government.
We are here to take care of your needs, so we will call you the People.
The nanny, we will consider her the Working Class.
And your baby brother, we will call him the Future.
Now think about that and see if it makes sense..'
So the little boy goes off to bed thinking about what Dad has said.
Later that night, he hears his baby brother crying, so he gets up to check on him . He finds that the baby has severely soiled his diaper. So the little boy goes to his parent's room and finds his mother asleep. Not wanting to wake her, he goes to the nanny's room. Finding the door locked, he peeks in the keyhole and sees his father in bed with the nanny.
He gives up and goes back to bed .
The next morning, the little boy says to his father, 'Dad, I think I understand the concept of politics now. '
The father says, 'Good, son, tell me in your own words what you think politics is all about.'
The little boy replies, 'The President is screwing the Working Class while the Government is sound asleep. The People are being ignored and the future is in deep shit.
THANK YOU CORKY BORDELAY
Dad says, 'Well son, let me try to explain it this way:
I am the head of the family, so call me The President.
Your mother is the administrator of the money, so we call her the Government.
We are here to take care of your needs, so we will call you the People.
The nanny, we will consider her the Working Class.
And your baby brother, we will call him the Future.
Now think about that and see if it makes sense..'
So the little boy goes off to bed thinking about what Dad has said.
Later that night, he hears his baby brother crying, so he gets up to check on him . He finds that the baby has severely soiled his diaper. So the little boy goes to his parent's room and finds his mother asleep. Not wanting to wake her, he goes to the nanny's room. Finding the door locked, he peeks in the keyhole and sees his father in bed with the nanny.
He gives up and goes back to bed .
The next morning, the little boy says to his father, 'Dad, I think I understand the concept of politics now. '
The father says, 'Good, son, tell me in your own words what you think politics is all about.'
The little boy replies, 'The President is screwing the Working Class while the Government is sound asleep. The People are being ignored and the future is in deep shit.
THANK YOU CORKY BORDELAY
Thursday, October 16, 2008
GOD'S PLAN FOR JOHN McCAIN & SARAH PALIN
Sarah Palin, John McCain's running mate in the United States presidential election campaign of 2008, prays that the national leadership perform their tasks at the request of God. God's plans, according to Palin's belief system, are for the good of mankind.
I agree to that idea, only with a rather narrow focus; that God planned that John McCain choose Sarah Palin as his vice-presidential nominee in his election capaign, for the good of the American people.
God figured that the American people, having voted George W. Bush into office TWICE with Dick Cheney as vice-president, could not have been very astute. After all, His goal in those elections was that the people would choose better leaders for themselves by having such obvious choices between GOOD; intelligence. experience, knowledge, truthfulnrss, and honorability and EVIL; what the rapaciousness degradation the Bush Cheney ticket provided for them over eight years.
"I DIDN'T DO SUCH A GOOD JOB," said God, to no one in particular. "I'D BETTER MAKE IT CLEARER THIS TIME."
So He in His wisdom chose Sarah Palin to be John McCain's running mate, depending upon the American people's intelligence, even so low on the I.Q. scale, to figure out that Ms. Palin was clearly, substantially, signigicantly, majorly, etc. incapable and actually dangerous as a V.P. and potentially, were she to (Myself forbid, said God,) become president, be a major tragedy for America and the world, and would so scarify the people at the thought of it, they would vote Barak Obama into office on that single issue alone.
Let's hope God got it right this time. (If there is a God.)
I agree to that idea, only with a rather narrow focus; that God planned that John McCain choose Sarah Palin as his vice-presidential nominee in his election capaign, for the good of the American people.
God figured that the American people, having voted George W. Bush into office TWICE with Dick Cheney as vice-president, could not have been very astute. After all, His goal in those elections was that the people would choose better leaders for themselves by having such obvious choices between GOOD; intelligence. experience, knowledge, truthfulnrss, and honorability and EVIL; what the rapaciousness degradation the Bush Cheney ticket provided for them over eight years.
"I DIDN'T DO SUCH A GOOD JOB," said God, to no one in particular. "I'D BETTER MAKE IT CLEARER THIS TIME."
So He in His wisdom chose Sarah Palin to be John McCain's running mate, depending upon the American people's intelligence, even so low on the I.Q. scale, to figure out that Ms. Palin was clearly, substantially, signigicantly, majorly, etc. incapable and actually dangerous as a V.P. and potentially, were she to (Myself forbid, said God,) become president, be a major tragedy for America and the world, and would so scarify the people at the thought of it, they would vote Barak Obama into office on that single issue alone.
Let's hope God got it right this time. (If there is a God.)
Saturday, October 11, 2008
THE POWER OF RELIGION - PART ONE
THE BIRTH OF BELIEF AND RELIGION
No other force in the history of human development has so entered the minds of the peoples of the earth as belief in a higher power, in God. In the ongoing attempt to segregate “nature” and “nurture” to determine behavior, no single attribute comes closer to nature’s DNA than nurture’s inculcation of belief.
The ideological attempt to conquer this phenomenon by communist countries’ pursuit of Marxian dogma has failed to eliminate the almost universal acceptance of god as real and active. Russia and its separated states have seen the return of the churches and the churchmen into the minds, hearts, and pockets of the people. In the China of today, where religion has been renounced for decades and is opposed by the State, a resurgence of religious belief and affiliation is surreptitiously taking place. In Turkey, when the Ottoman Empire was overthrown after World War I, church and state were separated firmly by law. Yet in the beginning of the 21st century, religionists were elected to power despite constitutional prohibitions. And the Arab world is beset with ignorance of almost everything except guns and religion.
How has this powerful force been created and why has it continued through the ages to a time when communist countries created laws that prohibited observance of the belief in god and the United States, the first nation that separated church and state by law, now allows laws on the books of various states mandating the belief in god. (One cannot serve on a jury in some states if one is a declared atheist.) Atheism as “anathema” has spread over the entire globe. How this has happened and how it continues to happen is easier to explain, easier to find the mechanisms for the expansion of religion, than why it continues to penetrate the minds of the masses with their acquiescence in view of its strong negative results in money and blood.
HOW RELIGION AND THE BELIEF IN GOD HAS BEEN INCULCATED IN ALL PEOPLES THROUGHOUT HUMAN HISTORY
Is belief in the un-provable, unknowable and un-seeable a “natural” phenomenon? Is belief a survival tactic in the Darwinian sense, passed down through the ages by the fittest of Homo sapiens? Does Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, also called “ritual,” a common denominator in all religions, primitive and modern, provide power to overcome the ills to which mankind has been and is subjected; ills like poverty, disease, and war? (Note that two of these three are man-made.)
Is the corrosiveness of fear of the unknown dissipated by religion and its minions providing believers un-provable and often absurd answers about the nature of the “Unknown.” Pre-civilization belief in higher powers grew from awe in unexplainable natural events, some of which were life giving and others of which were life-threatening or life-taking. Sun, rain, lightening and thunder, flood and earthquake were inexplicable events. Forests, lakes, rivers, oceans, mountains, and all of natures’ living creatures provided man’s food, clothing, and shelter and his growing brain with food for thought. Birth, but more so, death, operated to create personal unknowns and fears.
Pantheistic gods were created and passed down from generation to generation with embellishments based on existential experience with the forces and laws of nature. As mankind spread over the face of the earth, similar gods and natural religions in all societies grew out of similar experiences.
Such originally natural religions were co-opted and creatively expanded and manipulated by smart and charismatic shamans who created “priesthoods” and exploited mankind’s fears and the inexplicable nature of those natural phenomena to provide money and produce power for themselves. They created the trade of selling belief as relief and made-up “answers” to the mysterious unknowable events in the lives of the gullible. They built “religion” with all of its obeisance to edifices, costumes, numerology, ritual, absurd beliefs and mumbo-jumbo.
Religious leaders are “ordained.” They have been provided with “authority” to deal in the answers about the unknown and the un-provable. They can explain the inexplicable. And they do so with the authority that higher-ups in the religious hierarchy have given them. They are the passageways to the unknown and the inexplicable. They are also the passageways for believers’ money and loyalty. Through them, the congregations provide the monetary where-withal for the spread of religion and the soldiers’ bodies for loyalty to the nations in which they reside.
Rituals and ritualistic behavior are building blocks in the religious edifice that occupies the minds of believers. From the seven days of the Creation to the Ten Commandments to biblical numerology, the magic and power in numbers in religious observance is incredible. Every religion has numbers as potent totems of power. There are days when you must do and days when you are prohibited from doing. You must bow or not bow. The sun, the moon, and the stars may command you. So too with foods, the times of eating and the times of fasting, the acceptability of certain foods and the prohibitions on others, permeate all religions. Clothing that is worn at all times or on certain days. Caps and shawls, fringes and coat lengths, white caparison for the dead in China and the living in the western world. From childhood to deathbed, religion provides the vehicle for belief and relief.
The general answer to the “How?” religion became entrenched is that belief provides relief. But first, people must be taught to be in awe, to be afraid, to believe in belief as the answer to problems and pain, to the end of history or the end of the world. Belief must provide “salvation” and forgiveness for sins. And the more complicated the beliefs and the rituals, the more saleable they become to the common people.
No other force in the history of human development has so entered the minds of the peoples of the earth as belief in a higher power, in God. In the ongoing attempt to segregate “nature” and “nurture” to determine behavior, no single attribute comes closer to nature’s DNA than nurture’s inculcation of belief.
The ideological attempt to conquer this phenomenon by communist countries’ pursuit of Marxian dogma has failed to eliminate the almost universal acceptance of god as real and active. Russia and its separated states have seen the return of the churches and the churchmen into the minds, hearts, and pockets of the people. In the China of today, where religion has been renounced for decades and is opposed by the State, a resurgence of religious belief and affiliation is surreptitiously taking place. In Turkey, when the Ottoman Empire was overthrown after World War I, church and state were separated firmly by law. Yet in the beginning of the 21st century, religionists were elected to power despite constitutional prohibitions. And the Arab world is beset with ignorance of almost everything except guns and religion.
How has this powerful force been created and why has it continued through the ages to a time when communist countries created laws that prohibited observance of the belief in god and the United States, the first nation that separated church and state by law, now allows laws on the books of various states mandating the belief in god. (One cannot serve on a jury in some states if one is a declared atheist.) Atheism as “anathema” has spread over the entire globe. How this has happened and how it continues to happen is easier to explain, easier to find the mechanisms for the expansion of religion, than why it continues to penetrate the minds of the masses with their acquiescence in view of its strong negative results in money and blood.
HOW RELIGION AND THE BELIEF IN GOD HAS BEEN INCULCATED IN ALL PEOPLES THROUGHOUT HUMAN HISTORY
Is belief in the un-provable, unknowable and un-seeable a “natural” phenomenon? Is belief a survival tactic in the Darwinian sense, passed down through the ages by the fittest of Homo sapiens? Does Obsessive Compulsive Disorder, also called “ritual,” a common denominator in all religions, primitive and modern, provide power to overcome the ills to which mankind has been and is subjected; ills like poverty, disease, and war? (Note that two of these three are man-made.)
Is the corrosiveness of fear of the unknown dissipated by religion and its minions providing believers un-provable and often absurd answers about the nature of the “Unknown.” Pre-civilization belief in higher powers grew from awe in unexplainable natural events, some of which were life giving and others of which were life-threatening or life-taking. Sun, rain, lightening and thunder, flood and earthquake were inexplicable events. Forests, lakes, rivers, oceans, mountains, and all of natures’ living creatures provided man’s food, clothing, and shelter and his growing brain with food for thought. Birth, but more so, death, operated to create personal unknowns and fears.
Pantheistic gods were created and passed down from generation to generation with embellishments based on existential experience with the forces and laws of nature. As mankind spread over the face of the earth, similar gods and natural religions in all societies grew out of similar experiences.
Such originally natural religions were co-opted and creatively expanded and manipulated by smart and charismatic shamans who created “priesthoods” and exploited mankind’s fears and the inexplicable nature of those natural phenomena to provide money and produce power for themselves. They created the trade of selling belief as relief and made-up “answers” to the mysterious unknowable events in the lives of the gullible. They built “religion” with all of its obeisance to edifices, costumes, numerology, ritual, absurd beliefs and mumbo-jumbo.
Religious leaders are “ordained.” They have been provided with “authority” to deal in the answers about the unknown and the un-provable. They can explain the inexplicable. And they do so with the authority that higher-ups in the religious hierarchy have given them. They are the passageways to the unknown and the inexplicable. They are also the passageways for believers’ money and loyalty. Through them, the congregations provide the monetary where-withal for the spread of religion and the soldiers’ bodies for loyalty to the nations in which they reside.
Rituals and ritualistic behavior are building blocks in the religious edifice that occupies the minds of believers. From the seven days of the Creation to the Ten Commandments to biblical numerology, the magic and power in numbers in religious observance is incredible. Every religion has numbers as potent totems of power. There are days when you must do and days when you are prohibited from doing. You must bow or not bow. The sun, the moon, and the stars may command you. So too with foods, the times of eating and the times of fasting, the acceptability of certain foods and the prohibitions on others, permeate all religions. Clothing that is worn at all times or on certain days. Caps and shawls, fringes and coat lengths, white caparison for the dead in China and the living in the western world. From childhood to deathbed, religion provides the vehicle for belief and relief.
The general answer to the “How?” religion became entrenched is that belief provides relief. But first, people must be taught to be in awe, to be afraid, to believe in belief as the answer to problems and pain, to the end of history or the end of the world. Belief must provide “salvation” and forgiveness for sins. And the more complicated the beliefs and the rituals, the more saleable they become to the common people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)