Friday, November 11, 2005
Monday, November 07, 2005
Does your mind accept the ideas in this article?
http://www.newsday.com/news/printedition/newyork/nyc-nycons064501480nov06,0,3646064.story?coll=nyc-nynews-print
For those who cannot get there by clicking on the above URL, here is the article: (Comments below the insert)
===========================NYC Print Edition -----------------
CONSPIRACY THEORIES
The truth is out there - maybe
BY MARY VOBORILSTAFF WRITER
November 6, 2005
Sept. 11 conspiracy theories have edged into the mainstream.
In September, Fire Department chaplain candidate Imam Intikab Habib questioned whether Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida were responsible for the attacks, then quickly withdrew from the job. A short time later came a two-day conference in New York City that was built around the charge that "controlled demolition" brought down the World Trade Center.
Conspiracy books proliferate, and the Internet is such a cyber-trove of 9/11 arcana - Google the term "9/11 conspiracy," and 5.4 million entries turn up - that one site includes a primer, "Navigation for 9/11 Newbies."
As a cultural phenomenon, though, it's all been seen before: This is a conspiracy nation, and it has been almost since its founding. Those who study conspiracy rhetoric say beliefs in various 9/11 cabals are entirely predictable, that conspiracy narratives, ranging from the thoughtful and plausible to the fringy and fanciful, always have been threaded throughout American culture. (In late 2003, the 925-page "Conspiracy Theories in American History: An Encyclopedia" was published.)
Sense of comfort
A recurring trend, conspiracy theories tend to emerge after major national events as a means of making sense of the senseless.
"The most ambitious conspiracy theories are, in a way, oddly comforting to the people who hold them," said Michael Barkun, a professor of political science at Syracuse University and the author of "A Culture of Conspiracy: Apocalyptic Visions in Contemporary America," published in 2003.
Historically, Barkun said, conspiracy theories share "a number of related characteristics: that nothing happens by accident, that nothing is as it seems, that everything is connected. Conspiracy theorists have a view of the world in which there is no coincidence - nothing happens because of human stupidity or randomness. Somehow, everything is part of a pattern."
And, said Mark Fenster, a University of Florida assistant law professor whose book "Conspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture" was published in 1999, "The greater the trauma, the more the desire to have some sort of rational explanation for it ... a desire to have things be explicable in a cause-and-effect framework."
When an official account finally does emerge, added Chip Berlet, a senior analyst at Political Research Associates, an independent nonprofit based in Somerville, Mass., "there often aren't answers to all the questions. In any investigation, many paths lead nowhere," leaving some disgruntled, angst-ridden and suspicious.
Conspiracy theorists then "turn to the only explanation that's left, which discards randomness," said Berlet, who has studied conspiracy movements. "They develop a very comforting and simple theory that ultimately a handful of really bad people did it."
The way some people connect the dots, 9/11 was the work of the U.S. military; the Twin Towers and 7 World Trade Center were wired with explosives and deliberately blown up; a satellite-guided missile, not a hijacked jet, plowed into the Pentagon; the jet that crashed in a Pennsylvania field actually was shot down by Sidewinder missiles.
Some of those who promulgate conspiracy theories are angry and powerless, Berlet said, and to those susceptible to conspiracy theories, "they become a hero because they are sounding the alarms."
Before the Internet, alarms were sounded by word of mouth or by publications that rarely merited serious note in the mainstream media. The blogosphere changed that, with everyone now his or her own desktop publisher. Anyone with low-grade fears or suspicions can find kindred spirits almost instantly.
Seeds of fear
Some conspiracy theories spring up as an overreaction to "the fear and the loathing that occurs when there is destruction or damage," said Dr. Marc Siegel, who teaches at New York University Medical Center and whose latest book is "False Alarm: The Truth About the Epidemic of Fear."
But a contributing factor, he said, is that "the United States government and others are not inspiring confidence. You almost get a choice: You either inspire people through positive emotion or through negative emotion.
"Right now, the climate is fear. If the government is scaring people all the time, it's only about three steps away from that to distrust the government, too, and say, 'What did they do? Are they behind it?'"
"Fear easily turns to paranoia when there is a climate of distrust that the government is participating in, when you cannot trust your information sources," Siegel said.
That in turn spawns conspiracy theories, which columnist Christopher Hitchens calls "the white noise which moves in to fill the vacuity of the official version."
For all the transfiguring awfulness of 9/11, subsequent conspiracies have not overtaken the public imagination the way the Kennedy assassination did in 1963, a skepticism that persists to this day.
Conspiracy has been a recurring topic in political discourse since ancient times, though the most fertile ground has been that of American history, according to Michael William Pfau, whose book "The Political Style of Conspiracy: Chase, Sumner and Lincoln," is to be published this month.
In the 1850s, for example, the North and the South used conspiracy theories to discredit each other. Southerners feared that Northerners conspired to create slave revolts because the North sought to destroy the institution of slavery. Northerners believed that Southerners were determined to spread slavery throughout the Western states. The Republican party, Pfau says, rose to power in 1860 partly through the use of such rhetoric.
Kernels of truth
Florida's Fenster noted in a telephone interview that to label something a conspiracy theory "is an act of political rhetoric. It's an act of de-legitimization of something." And some of those who study so-called "conspiracy narratives" say it's a mistake to automatically dismiss or marginalize them, because sometimes they hint at a larger truth.
Or they are exactly on target.
In the 1960s, some warned of FBI surveillance of dissidents and infiltration of anti-war and countercultural groups, and they were disdained as paranoid. That very activity, of course, was a staple of the J. Edgar Hoover era, as were Cold War claims that the civil rights, voting rights and other progressive movements were "communist conspiracies."
Fears that the government deliberately spread AIDS and recreational drugs in inner cities may strain credulity, but, in the infamous Tuskegee syphilis program, the U.S. Public Health Service did experiment on 399 black men, a program that ended only in 1972.
Supposedly complicit in the 9/11 cover-ups is the national media cartel - which leads Berlet, of Political Research Associates, to wonder, "How could there be a conspiracy involving the military, the executive branch, Congress and the media in which somebody didn't rat it out and get a Pulitzer Prize?" He adds, "It's very difficult to maintain conspiracies over any length of time with a large number of people. Inevitably, someone rats it out. Or someone gets arrested and turns."
=============================
My comments:
Since the middle ages, governments have used the 'purloined letter' method of de-
legitimization of leaked information, 'hiding it in plain sight'.
When something is leaked or is deduced which is true, the government will make ten thousand slightly different stories which makes the acceptance of any true story very unlikely, mainly because who can figure out which is true and the rest false? Most people, faced with all the slightly different versions, will simply opt out of even checking out any of them, becoming blind followers of the government's version.
Also, the conditioning of the population to the acceptance of those with letters after their names, either political, religious, or academic, allows the government or the terrorists, (especially if they are the same people) to simply put something horrific but true to rest in the popular mind by having a 'accredited authority' come forth and pronounce this one true and that one false. In our culture, it works amazingly well.
As to the idea that someone 'in the know' can come forward and win awards by blowing the lie out of the water and into popular knowledge, it seldom happens because of the 'wipe from history' threat maintained by most terrorists, government or freelance.
If someone talks, tells the truth, they are simply killed, their families are killed, and in the 3rd world, sometimes their entire village was killed, wiping them from existence totally, or as totally as possible.
Winning awards, getting into the public eye, ends quickly when the award winner is killed 'robbing a store' and their family dies in some 'freak but common accident'. This tends to chill anyone else who hears of the events and knows anything.
A myth, you say?
It's called a 'redundant deterrent motivator'.
There are other strategies used to blind the minds of those who seek out what really happened.
The American government has a policy of 'no paper trail' since the viet nam war, and that has gotten easier since everything has gone computerized.
The science of measuring people's personalities and finding those who will do what they are told and not talk about it has jumped by leaps and bounds over the last few decades.
Also, 'accidents' and 'random murders' are really well scripted now. Anyone who has any real proof of government murder finds themselves living the movie 'run from the authorities' scenario, but unlike the movies, they don't survive.
I've often wondered what was going on when the Simson trial was blocking out all other news a decade or so ago, and many other events which blanked out all other news.
Nuff said!
http://www.newsday.com/news/printedition/newyork/nyc-nycons064501480nov06,0,3646064.story?coll=nyc-nynews-print
For those who cannot get there by clicking on the above URL, here is the article: (Comments below the insert)
===========================NYC Print Edition -----------------
CONSPIRACY THEORIES
The truth is out there - maybe
BY MARY VOBORILSTAFF WRITER
November 6, 2005
Sept. 11 conspiracy theories have edged into the mainstream.
In September, Fire Department chaplain candidate Imam Intikab Habib questioned whether Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida were responsible for the attacks, then quickly withdrew from the job. A short time later came a two-day conference in New York City that was built around the charge that "controlled demolition" brought down the World Trade Center.
Conspiracy books proliferate, and the Internet is such a cyber-trove of 9/11 arcana - Google the term "9/11 conspiracy," and 5.4 million entries turn up - that one site includes a primer, "Navigation for 9/11 Newbies."
As a cultural phenomenon, though, it's all been seen before: This is a conspiracy nation, and it has been almost since its founding. Those who study conspiracy rhetoric say beliefs in various 9/11 cabals are entirely predictable, that conspiracy narratives, ranging from the thoughtful and plausible to the fringy and fanciful, always have been threaded throughout American culture. (In late 2003, the 925-page "Conspiracy Theories in American History: An Encyclopedia" was published.)
Sense of comfort
A recurring trend, conspiracy theories tend to emerge after major national events as a means of making sense of the senseless.
"The most ambitious conspiracy theories are, in a way, oddly comforting to the people who hold them," said Michael Barkun, a professor of political science at Syracuse University and the author of "A Culture of Conspiracy: Apocalyptic Visions in Contemporary America," published in 2003.
Historically, Barkun said, conspiracy theories share "a number of related characteristics: that nothing happens by accident, that nothing is as it seems, that everything is connected. Conspiracy theorists have a view of the world in which there is no coincidence - nothing happens because of human stupidity or randomness. Somehow, everything is part of a pattern."
And, said Mark Fenster, a University of Florida assistant law professor whose book "Conspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture" was published in 1999, "The greater the trauma, the more the desire to have some sort of rational explanation for it ... a desire to have things be explicable in a cause-and-effect framework."
When an official account finally does emerge, added Chip Berlet, a senior analyst at Political Research Associates, an independent nonprofit based in Somerville, Mass., "there often aren't answers to all the questions. In any investigation, many paths lead nowhere," leaving some disgruntled, angst-ridden and suspicious.
Conspiracy theorists then "turn to the only explanation that's left, which discards randomness," said Berlet, who has studied conspiracy movements. "They develop a very comforting and simple theory that ultimately a handful of really bad people did it."
The way some people connect the dots, 9/11 was the work of the U.S. military; the Twin Towers and 7 World Trade Center were wired with explosives and deliberately blown up; a satellite-guided missile, not a hijacked jet, plowed into the Pentagon; the jet that crashed in a Pennsylvania field actually was shot down by Sidewinder missiles.
Some of those who promulgate conspiracy theories are angry and powerless, Berlet said, and to those susceptible to conspiracy theories, "they become a hero because they are sounding the alarms."
Before the Internet, alarms were sounded by word of mouth or by publications that rarely merited serious note in the mainstream media. The blogosphere changed that, with everyone now his or her own desktop publisher. Anyone with low-grade fears or suspicions can find kindred spirits almost instantly.
Seeds of fear
Some conspiracy theories spring up as an overreaction to "the fear and the loathing that occurs when there is destruction or damage," said Dr. Marc Siegel, who teaches at New York University Medical Center and whose latest book is "False Alarm: The Truth About the Epidemic of Fear."
But a contributing factor, he said, is that "the United States government and others are not inspiring confidence. You almost get a choice: You either inspire people through positive emotion or through negative emotion.
"Right now, the climate is fear. If the government is scaring people all the time, it's only about three steps away from that to distrust the government, too, and say, 'What did they do? Are they behind it?'"
"Fear easily turns to paranoia when there is a climate of distrust that the government is participating in, when you cannot trust your information sources," Siegel said.
That in turn spawns conspiracy theories, which columnist Christopher Hitchens calls "the white noise which moves in to fill the vacuity of the official version."
For all the transfiguring awfulness of 9/11, subsequent conspiracies have not overtaken the public imagination the way the Kennedy assassination did in 1963, a skepticism that persists to this day.
Conspiracy has been a recurring topic in political discourse since ancient times, though the most fertile ground has been that of American history, according to Michael William Pfau, whose book "The Political Style of Conspiracy: Chase, Sumner and Lincoln," is to be published this month.
In the 1850s, for example, the North and the South used conspiracy theories to discredit each other. Southerners feared that Northerners conspired to create slave revolts because the North sought to destroy the institution of slavery. Northerners believed that Southerners were determined to spread slavery throughout the Western states. The Republican party, Pfau says, rose to power in 1860 partly through the use of such rhetoric.
Kernels of truth
Florida's Fenster noted in a telephone interview that to label something a conspiracy theory "is an act of political rhetoric. It's an act of de-legitimization of something." And some of those who study so-called "conspiracy narratives" say it's a mistake to automatically dismiss or marginalize them, because sometimes they hint at a larger truth.
Or they are exactly on target.
In the 1960s, some warned of FBI surveillance of dissidents and infiltration of anti-war and countercultural groups, and they were disdained as paranoid. That very activity, of course, was a staple of the J. Edgar Hoover era, as were Cold War claims that the civil rights, voting rights and other progressive movements were "communist conspiracies."
Fears that the government deliberately spread AIDS and recreational drugs in inner cities may strain credulity, but, in the infamous Tuskegee syphilis program, the U.S. Public Health Service did experiment on 399 black men, a program that ended only in 1972.
Supposedly complicit in the 9/11 cover-ups is the national media cartel - which leads Berlet, of Political Research Associates, to wonder, "How could there be a conspiracy involving the military, the executive branch, Congress and the media in which somebody didn't rat it out and get a Pulitzer Prize?" He adds, "It's very difficult to maintain conspiracies over any length of time with a large number of people. Inevitably, someone rats it out. Or someone gets arrested and turns."
=============================
My comments:
Since the middle ages, governments have used the 'purloined letter' method of de-
legitimization of leaked information, 'hiding it in plain sight'.
When something is leaked or is deduced which is true, the government will make ten thousand slightly different stories which makes the acceptance of any true story very unlikely, mainly because who can figure out which is true and the rest false? Most people, faced with all the slightly different versions, will simply opt out of even checking out any of them, becoming blind followers of the government's version.
Also, the conditioning of the population to the acceptance of those with letters after their names, either political, religious, or academic, allows the government or the terrorists, (especially if they are the same people) to simply put something horrific but true to rest in the popular mind by having a 'accredited authority' come forth and pronounce this one true and that one false. In our culture, it works amazingly well.
As to the idea that someone 'in the know' can come forward and win awards by blowing the lie out of the water and into popular knowledge, it seldom happens because of the 'wipe from history' threat maintained by most terrorists, government or freelance.
If someone talks, tells the truth, they are simply killed, their families are killed, and in the 3rd world, sometimes their entire village was killed, wiping them from existence totally, or as totally as possible.
Winning awards, getting into the public eye, ends quickly when the award winner is killed 'robbing a store' and their family dies in some 'freak but common accident'. This tends to chill anyone else who hears of the events and knows anything.
A myth, you say?
It's called a 'redundant deterrent motivator'.
There are other strategies used to blind the minds of those who seek out what really happened.
The American government has a policy of 'no paper trail' since the viet nam war, and that has gotten easier since everything has gone computerized.
The science of measuring people's personalities and finding those who will do what they are told and not talk about it has jumped by leaps and bounds over the last few decades.
Also, 'accidents' and 'random murders' are really well scripted now. Anyone who has any real proof of government murder finds themselves living the movie 'run from the authorities' scenario, but unlike the movies, they don't survive.
I've often wondered what was going on when the Simson trial was blocking out all other news a decade or so ago, and many other events which blanked out all other news.
Nuff said!
Thursday, October 27, 2005
Activism
"So often activism is based on what we are against, what we don't like, what we don't want. And yet we manifest what we focus on. And so we are manifesting yet ever more of what we don't want, what we don't like, what we want to change."
"So for me, activism is about a spiritual practice as a way of life. And I realized I didn't climb the tree because I was angry at the corporations and the government; I climbed the tree because when I fell in love with the redwoods, I fell in love with the world. So it is my feeling of 'connection' that drives me, instead of my anger and feelings of being disconnected."
-Julia Butterfly Hill
"So often activism is based on what we are against, what we don't like, what we don't want. And yet we manifest what we focus on. And so we are manifesting yet ever more of what we don't want, what we don't like, what we want to change."
"So for me, activism is about a spiritual practice as a way of life. And I realized I didn't climb the tree because I was angry at the corporations and the government; I climbed the tree because when I fell in love with the redwoods, I fell in love with the world. So it is my feeling of 'connection' that drives me, instead of my anger and feelings of being disconnected."
-Julia Butterfly Hill
Tuesday, October 18, 2005
"Stay and finish the job or there will be hell to pay. The bad guys will win then."
"If we don't support the war, then we are not supporting the troops!"
"If we educate the people, they will demand withdrawal from the war."
"If we demonstrate and get media attention, people will realize many don't want our sons and daughters killed in a useless war created for a president's ego and personal wealth."
I heard all these ideas and arguments back in the Viet Nam era, and eventually we got out and the'bad guys' won back their country. It was horrible, but no more horrible than the war itself, and I think that applies to Iraq also. The aftermath of the VN war was millions sick and dying from the after effects of Agent Orange, land mines, and other horrific nastiness used during the war.
The longer we are there, the more poisoned and devastated the countryside will become for generations afterwards, if only from the spent Uranium bullets used there. We must work to get those poor enslaved men and women out of that country and back home, for everyone's sake.
The real problem is the Fascist in government. With the bankruptcy, credit card, and vet degrading bills passed by the Fascists, and their control of the media, now they are going after the universities and colleges, with intent upon decreeing the criteria that can be taught in those schools.
Does this remind anyone of what happened in Germany as Hitler came to power? The Dominionist Fascist agenda is apparently much like the NAZI one, and being implemented as we speak. How do we take back America from well entrenched Fascists?
Voting doesn't do it... they control the process as is apparent after the two coups they have pulled off already. Writing congressmen doesn't do it when the left is scared to death of ending up 'disappeared' or worse, their family as hostages for their behavior, (why else are they so quiet and submissive?), and writing to right wingers might well get you on some list of 'malcontents' or 'liberals'.
Signing petitions is a really dumb thing to do in these times. Ready made lists of 'political traitors who don't support Der Leader'...
It can't be taken back violently unless the military sides with the people, which is unlikely as the German Army siding with the anti-Hitler people in Germany,and frankly, all the guns in all the civilian basements are really just a great way to become a military target. The technology of war and 'intelligence' is too developed to fight a revolution. There's no chance of winning. Everything has changed to make revolution in America impossible.
Now we have to find some peaceful way of raising consciousness or sidestepping the issue with the development of new technologies which short circuit the strategies of the Fascists. This is not some neoNazi skinhead group who want to create a new Nazi America... this is a huge group of religious fascists who have more control, power, and resources than any political or religious group in the history of Humanity. Opinion polls are meaningless in the face of such power.
But we could pool our brains and educations and create technology which could indirectly sidestep the old ways of thinking these Dominionist fascists use in their strategy.
An example from India... change the length of a broom handle and increase the time a person can live without back pain, which changes the way they interact with the younger generations, which helps spread wisdom and perspective through the youth. I'm not suggesting that a broom handle is the answer, but there must be technology not thought of which would change everything in ways that brings freedom despite the best efforts of those who are set on taking it away in the name of their illusionary 'God'.
Lest you think I am speaking of the impossible, it was 'impossible' at the beginning of my lifetime to speak around the world on tiny threads of glass and go to the moon and talk to someone on a phone in a car and half a million other technologies which now shape our world.
If not you, who?You got something better to do with your lifetime of experience and wisdom than save the planet?
End of rant.
Saturday, October 08, 2005
"Power always thinks it has a great soul and vast views beyond the comprehension of the weak; and that it is doing God's service when it is violating all hislaws." : John Adams
***********************************
War: first, one hopes to win; then one expects the enemy to lose; then, one is satisfied that he too is suffering; in the end, one is surprised that everyone has lost. : Karl Kraus (1874–1936)
***********************************
"It is part of the general pattern of misguided policy that our country is now geared to an arms economy which was bred in an artificually induced psychosis of war hysteria and nurtured upon an incessant propaganda of fear." : General Douglas MacArthur, Speech, May 15, 1951
Wednesday, October 05, 2005
From the Onion http://www.theonion.com/
GOD ANGRILY CLARIFIES "DON'T KILL" RULE
NEW YORK — Responding to recent events on Earth, God, the omniscient creator-deity worshipped by billions of followers of various faiths for more than 6,000 years, angrily clarified His longtime stance against humans killing each other Monday.
"Look, I don't know, maybe I haven't made myself completely clear, so for the record, here it is again," said the Lord, His divine face betraying visible emotion during a press conference near the site of the fallen Twin Towers. "Somehow, people keep coming up with the idea that I want them to kill their neighbor. Well, I don't. And to be honest, I'm really getting sick and tired of it. Get it straight. Not only do I not want anybody to kill anyone, but I specifically commanded you not to, in really simple terms that anybody ought to be able to understand."
Worshipped by Christians, Jews, and Muslims alike, God said His name has been invoked countless times over the centuries as a reason to kill in what He called "an unending cycle of violence."
"I don't care how holy somebody claims to be," God said. "If a person tells you it's My will that they kill someone, they're wrong. Got it? I don't care what religion you are, or who you think your enemy is, here it is one more time: No killing, in My name or anyone else's, ever again."
The press conference came as a surprise to humankind, as God rarely intervenes in earthly affairs. As a matter of longstanding policy, He has traditionally left the task of interpreting His message and divine will to clerics, rabbis, priests, imams, and Biblical scholars. Theologians and laymen alike have been given the task of pondering His ineffable mysteries, deciding for themselves what to do as a matter of faith. His decision to manifest on the material plane was motivated by the deep sense of shock, outrage, and sorrow He felt over the Sept. 11 violence carried out in His name, and over its dire potential ramifications around the globe.
"I tried to put it in the simplest possible terms for you people, so you'd get it straight, because I thought it was pretty important," said God, called Yahweh and Allah respectively in the Judaic and Muslim traditions. "I guess I figured I'd left no real room for confusion after putting it in a four-word sentence with one-syllable words, on the tablets I gave to Moses. How much more clear can I get?"
"But somehow, it all gets twisted around and, next thing you know, somebody's spouting off some nonsense about, 'God says I have to kill this guy, God wants me to kill that guy, it's God's will,'" God continued. "It's not God's will, all right? News flash: 'God's will' equals 'Don't murder people.'"
Worse yet, many of the worst violators claim that their actions are justified by passages in the Bible, Torah, and Qur'an.
"To be honest, there's some contradictory stuff in there, okay?" God said. "So I can see how it could be pretty misleading. I admit it—My bad. I did My best to inspire them, but a lot of imperfect human agents have misinterpreted My message over the millennia. Frankly, much of the material that got in there is dogmatic, doctrinal bullshit. I turn My head for a second and, suddenly, all this stuff about homosexuality gets into Leviticus, and everybody thinks it's God's will to kill gays. It absolutely drives Me up the wall."
God praised the overwhelming majority of His Muslim followers as "wonderful, pious people," calling the perpetrators of the Sept. 11 attacks rare exceptions.
"This whole medieval concept of the jihad, or holy war, had all but vanished from the Muslim world in, like, the 10th century, and with good reason," God said. "There's no such thing as a holy war, only unholy ones. The vast majority of Muslims in this world reject the murderous actions of these radical extremists, just like the vast majority of Christians in America are pissed off over those two bigots on The 700 Club."
Continued God, "Read the book: 'Allah is kind, Allah is beautiful, Allah is merciful.' It goes on and on that way, page after page. But, no, some assholes have to come along and revive this stupid holy-war crap just to further their own hateful agenda. So now, everybody thinks Muslims are all murderous barbarians. Thanks, Taliban: 1,000 years of pan-Islamic cultural progress down the drain."
God stressed that His remarks were not directed exclusively at Islamic extremists, but rather at anyone whose ideological zealotry overrides his or her ability to comprehend the core message of all world religions.
"I don't care what faith you are, everybody's been making this same mistake since the dawn of time," God said. "The Muslims massacre the Hindus, the Hindus massacre the Muslims. The Buddhists, everybody massacres the Buddhists. The Jews, don't even get me started on the hardline, right-wing, Meir Kahane-loving Israeli nationalists, man. And the Christians? You people believe in a Messiah who says, 'Turn the other cheek,' but you've been killing everybody you can get your hands on since the Crusades."
Growing increasingly wrathful, God continued: "Can't you people see? What are you, morons? There are a ton of different religious traditions out there, and different cultures worship Me in different ways. But the basic message is always the same: Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, Shintoism... every religious belief system under the sun, they all say you're supposed to love your neighbors, folks! It's not that hard a concept to grasp."
"Why would you think I'd want anything else? Humans don't need religion or God as an excuse to kill each other—you've been doing that without any help from Me since you were freaking apes!" God said. "The whole point of believing in God is to have a higher standard of behavior. How obvious can you get?"
"I'm talking to all of you, here!" continued God, His voice rising to a shout. "Do you hear Me? I don't want you to kill anybody. I'm against it, across the board. How many times do I have to say it? Don't kill each other anymore—ever! I'm fucking serious!"
Upon completing His outburst, God fell silent, standing quietly at the podium for several moments. Then, witnesses reported, God's shoulders began to shake, and He wept.
Wednesday, August 31, 2005
Subject: Letter from a veteran
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 11:01:27 -0500
Folks,
For those who believe that public opposition to the war at home undermines the morale of troops in combat, here is a point of view from someone who knows what he is talking about. For the record, many I served with in Viet Nam were angry about the protests in the US (in no small part because we were demonized in the process), but they were not demoralized by it. They, like those of us who thought as the writer of this letter below does, were demoralized by incompetent, careerist leaders, a lack of rational strategy and politicians who play the game for their benefit with our lives. THAT was demoralizing.
Please pass this along, particularly to those who, without benefit of war time experience, claim that protesting the war demoralizes the troops.
Honor the warrior, not the war
Bring our troops home, now
Take care of them we they get home
Dave Collins
Austin contact, Viet Nam Veterans Against the War
=====================================================
http://www.lodinews.com/articles/2005/08/29/opinion/ltr_neely_050829.txt
Support our troops by keeping them out of war
I am a retired Army captain. I fought in Vietnam with the 196th LightInfantry Brigade. In Vietnam, I walked the jungle carrying an M-16. I know about anti-war protest, as I grew up in California during the 1960s.
Some people think that because someone does not support the war, that they do not support our troops. That is just not reality. There might be some soldiers who believe that protest equals lack of support, but the vast majority that I served with knew protesters were trying to end the madness.
Yes, we went over there, and yes, we fought the war, but almost none of us wanted to be there. But we stayed there and we fought, because that is what soldiers do.
Thank God that while we were there doing that, some brave people back here had the courage to stand up to say that war was wrong.
Thank God they were brave enough to act on their convictions and stand upto a government that had lied to us.
I applaud you! Maybe you could have treated me a little better when I got back, but that's another letter.
However, I do find incredibly offensive those who have never fought a war, never fired a shot at another human being, never been shot at or hunted, or never had to listen as a good friend screams in agony, sending or supporting the sending of our brave soldiers to war for lies.
Look at the facts. There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
There were no connections with the terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.
There were no reasons to go to war. You should be outraged.
You want to support our troops?
Keep them out of war and get rid of those who would put them in harm's way, unless absolutely necessary.
Maybe we can't leave Iraq immediately because of the mess we created, but we should get rid of those responsible for the current situation.
God bless our troops. I do not support the war, but I do support you.
George Neely
Lodi
====================================================================
Monday, August 29, 2005
I'm writing and posting this because I think Evil Emperor Bush is going to make it illegal to post anything on the Internet that criticizes or opposes him or his policies.
Let me say that again:
I'm writing and posting this because I think Evil Emperor Bush is going to make it illegal to post anything on the Internet,(and anywhere else,) that criticizes or opposes him or his policies!
I keep hearing these people who consider themselves "Conservative Patriots" saying that protestors are like noisy teens, ...or 'just' hippies, ...or inappropriate, ...or even TRAITORS! ...by not mindlessly supporting the President just because he is President and therefore must be right and sane and good.
(Aren't they thinking that 'God is on Our Side' and therefore Bush must be God's choice to lead us?)
'Supporting the troops' is somehow the reason for what they are saying.
Supporting the troops IS TO DO WHAT IS BEST FOR THE TROOPS, and when a traitor has taken over America with a coup and seems bent on creating a Holy American Fascist Empire over the bloody bodies of America's sons and daughters, THEN TO OPPOSE HIM IS SUPPORTING THE TROOPS, because they cannot do much against him, can they? And it is certainly not 'supporting them' if you support an evil fascist war and they come home in boxes, is it?
I think those who support Bush while thinking they are supporting the troops are not much different than those who are supporting the terrorists who fight against America. I think both are supporting terriorism and NOT supporting the troops, on either side.
I think it is traitorous to quietly sit back and let a tyrant take over your country. Protest IS the proper patriotic response to tyranny. I think it is not patriotic to support a tyrant's war killing your own citizens.
The soldiers who go believe in their Country, in defending their homes, and believe in what they are told, (---I certainly did during Viet Nam---) but once they find out what is going down, they should do what they can to stop the war. Putting your life on the line for America sometimes means putting your life on the line against tyrants when they have taken over America.
And no, I'm not talking about a civil war or revolution or anything like that. During Viet Nam, many soldiers didn't fight the war once they found out they were being sacrificed for the egos of old men making fortunes off their wounds and deaths, they simply stopped fighting instead. It is one thing to defend America and quite another to die for an insane Fascist President and his evil or duped cronies, who are making fortunes off the death of, and murder done, by patriotic soldiers.
(Soldiers are not mindless organic killing machines who have to do what they are told regardless of how evil the orders are or why they are given. Every soldier knows he is responsible for what he does regardless of his orders. God does not abolish his responsibility for what he does.)
What do you do when YOUR country is taken over by a bunch of cutthroat mobsters?
I think it is horribly traitorous to support a tyrant who has used the fear of a terrorist act to strip every American of every right in the Constitution of the United States! The vow every soldier takes is, or at least was, to defend the Constitution, not the tyrant just because he has manipulated himself into power... AND sometimes that means doing the unthinkable, whatever that might be. Bush is destroying America more than any terrorist ever had or could, and frankly, he is gaining on Hitler and Pol Pot in his infamy.
Republicans are supposed to be for the rights of the individual, for smaller government and less centralized government control of people's lives, for fiscal responsibility, for security... but Bush is tearing the republican goals to shreds, using their blind patriotism against them and against every American! He has taken away every right in the Constitution, swollen the federal government to a size never before seen, centralized power to such a degree the media is scared to tell the truth about it, written himself and his cronies a blank check which is bankrupting everyone in the country, and taken away all security from everyone.
There is so much that Bush the traitor has done that his supporters have to ignore, I think it puts many of them in the category of 'good Germans' during the rise of Hitler. Do I think he would, or will, set up concentration camps and kill people in mass? Ever see what a BunkerBuster bomb does to the people killed by it? There is little difference.
I really don't think anything is beyond his and his employers, whoever they are, who bought him his position, including killing millions of Americans as well as making America into a 3rd world country. He got in by a coup, kept it by intimidating his opponents with bought and paid for political appointees, and now he is killing the people. How much more do people need to see to understand what he is?
And I'm not predicting anything... all this is already done, and will America accept it? Remember, every German SS soldier's belt buckle had "God's on our side" on it. The Germans accepted it. And they learned the hard way the cost of freedom.
Let me say that again:
I'm writing and posting this because I think Evil Emperor Bush is going to make it illegal to post anything on the Internet,(and anywhere else,) that criticizes or opposes him or his policies!
I keep hearing these people who consider themselves "Conservative Patriots" saying that protestors are like noisy teens, ...or 'just' hippies, ...or inappropriate, ...or even TRAITORS! ...by not mindlessly supporting the President just because he is President and therefore must be right and sane and good.
(Aren't they thinking that 'God is on Our Side' and therefore Bush must be God's choice to lead us?)
'Supporting the troops' is somehow the reason for what they are saying.
Supporting the troops IS TO DO WHAT IS BEST FOR THE TROOPS, and when a traitor has taken over America with a coup and seems bent on creating a Holy American Fascist Empire over the bloody bodies of America's sons and daughters, THEN TO OPPOSE HIM IS SUPPORTING THE TROOPS, because they cannot do much against him, can they? And it is certainly not 'supporting them' if you support an evil fascist war and they come home in boxes, is it?
I think those who support Bush while thinking they are supporting the troops are not much different than those who are supporting the terrorists who fight against America. I think both are supporting terriorism and NOT supporting the troops, on either side.
I think it is traitorous to quietly sit back and let a tyrant take over your country. Protest IS the proper patriotic response to tyranny. I think it is not patriotic to support a tyrant's war killing your own citizens.
The soldiers who go believe in their Country, in defending their homes, and believe in what they are told, (---I certainly did during Viet Nam---) but once they find out what is going down, they should do what they can to stop the war. Putting your life on the line for America sometimes means putting your life on the line against tyrants when they have taken over America.
And no, I'm not talking about a civil war or revolution or anything like that. During Viet Nam, many soldiers didn't fight the war once they found out they were being sacrificed for the egos of old men making fortunes off their wounds and deaths, they simply stopped fighting instead. It is one thing to defend America and quite another to die for an insane Fascist President and his evil or duped cronies, who are making fortunes off the death of, and murder done, by patriotic soldiers.
(Soldiers are not mindless organic killing machines who have to do what they are told regardless of how evil the orders are or why they are given. Every soldier knows he is responsible for what he does regardless of his orders. God does not abolish his responsibility for what he does.)
What do you do when YOUR country is taken over by a bunch of cutthroat mobsters?
I think it is horribly traitorous to support a tyrant who has used the fear of a terrorist act to strip every American of every right in the Constitution of the United States! The vow every soldier takes is, or at least was, to defend the Constitution, not the tyrant just because he has manipulated himself into power... AND sometimes that means doing the unthinkable, whatever that might be. Bush is destroying America more than any terrorist ever had or could, and frankly, he is gaining on Hitler and Pol Pot in his infamy.
Republicans are supposed to be for the rights of the individual, for smaller government and less centralized government control of people's lives, for fiscal responsibility, for security... but Bush is tearing the republican goals to shreds, using their blind patriotism against them and against every American! He has taken away every right in the Constitution, swollen the federal government to a size never before seen, centralized power to such a degree the media is scared to tell the truth about it, written himself and his cronies a blank check which is bankrupting everyone in the country, and taken away all security from everyone.
There is so much that Bush the traitor has done that his supporters have to ignore, I think it puts many of them in the category of 'good Germans' during the rise of Hitler. Do I think he would, or will, set up concentration camps and kill people in mass? Ever see what a BunkerBuster bomb does to the people killed by it? There is little difference.
I really don't think anything is beyond his and his employers, whoever they are, who bought him his position, including killing millions of Americans as well as making America into a 3rd world country. He got in by a coup, kept it by intimidating his opponents with bought and paid for political appointees, and now he is killing the people. How much more do people need to see to understand what he is?
And I'm not predicting anything... all this is already done, and will America accept it? Remember, every German SS soldier's belt buckle had "God's on our side" on it. The Germans accepted it. And they learned the hard way the cost of freedom.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
About Me
- Roan Carratu
- I dedicated myself to saving the planet back in 1958,after an imaginative vision of the world destroyed by nuclear war. In my 10 year old mind, it made everything I was ever taught suspect, and I vowed to find out what was really true, knowing that only the truth, defined by Universe, would lead to the survival of Humanity and our ecosystem. Despite being sick for more than 15 years, I remain dedicated to that vision and the realizations I had because of it many times in my life. I know what we have to do, but getting people to think about it is very difficult indeed. I continue to try, for what else are our lives for?