National Review ran a story on Wednesday, February, 15 regarding a professor from Georgetown University named Jonathan Brown, who gave a speech defending slavery in Islam. In his speech is was said by multiple accounts (Andrew Harrod who wrote about this 1 week ago and does fantastic work on Islam & Jihad) that he spent much time condemning Western Civilization slavery while exonerating slavery in the middle east where Islam is ramped. All this despite the fact that The West abolished slavery some 170+ years ago. Allow me to take this a bit further because as we all know the National Review does not have the guts to speak the entire truth.
In practice, Islam is a disease.
If you're a person of Islamic faith that doesn't make you a disease. It just makes your religious text you worship one. Now if you can't separate the two then well, the shoe fits.
The West was built upon Judeo-Christian values. I am not a Jew so I won't pretend to know Judaism. I will say however the New Testament was clearly a collection of books and accounts for the individual's relationship with his God. Not the church. The individual. That individual mindset and the ability to separate the two gave us the fertile ground for a Constitution & Bill of Rights. It gave us the power and confidence to have a Separation of Church and State and Freedom of Religion. Because the story of Christ wins on ideas.
Islam, on the other hand, is the religion built upon the words of an illiterate warlord who took wives as young as 6 years old. The very same book that is interwoven with almost 500 passages of rule of law and judiciary revelations. Following the Koran thus creates a problem if you live in the West. Like Prof Jonathan Brown (who supports Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel), It forces you to have to explain things like slavery and stoning a woman for walking at night alone and being raped; to a college kid in the US in 2017. But apparently, it's not that hard to do after all. Brown (who is white and was an evangelical) himself was converted at the very same university in 2010 by his Islamic studies professor. Consider the words of this Professor from Georgetown:
What’s the difference between someone who is captured in a raid in the steppes of Central Asia brought to Istanbul’s slave market, sold to an owner, who, by the way, might treat her badly, might treat her incredibly well. She’s going to bear him children. She’s going to be a free woman. She’s going to be the mother of his children. If he’s high status, she’s going to be high status. If he dies she might be a very desirable wife. That person’s situation? What’s the difference between that and some woman who’s a poor baker’s daughter who gets married to some baker’s son without any choice because no one expects her to have any choice? And that baker’s son might treat her well. He might treat her horribly.
When Jesus said to his fellow Jews: “Give to Caesar what is Caesar's and give to God what is Gods” it put Jesus and the story of Jesus above anything man made. It did not attempt to set legislation or laws because those things are insignificant to Jesus. The Koran and its Sharia is about conquest and about rule of law mixed in with spirituality. This creates an impossible roadblock for the West at our most fundamental levels.
Jihadists sometimes refer to a group of “secular Muslims” and those are Muslims I support. If you're willing to stand up and denounce the Korans role in governmental affairs and laws much like a Christian can do here then I applaud you. But if not; do not call yourself a moderate. There is no moderate Muslim. Show me a moderate Muslim and will show you either an ignorant fool or a liar (Al-taqiyya).
I remember watching a youtube video some time ago when I first heard the term: “Useful Idiot” to describe the Marxist leftists both here and abroad. It was Yuri Bezmenov who spoke those words of truth, a former journalist and propagandist for the KGB who had direct knowledge of psychological warfare practiced by the USSR in the Cold War. Mr. Bezemenov defected to the West and wrote and lectured in a pro-West manner until his death in 1993.
In todays world, Bezemenov today would be rich. His speaking engagements would rival the Clintons in terms of monetary command (except for not being able to deliver State department approved favors for it). He predicted our societal cucking via the neoliberals and the hypersensitive liberal left that seems to not only permeate our culture but dominate it across so many various levels from government to media and everywhere in between. His accuracy and precision of society in a present day United States is in such a detailed manner he would make Nostradamus just another failed Myan forecaster. A Y2K truth-er. He was that damn good. It was this video that came to my mind after watching what unfolded after the dust settled and the smoke cleared in Aleppo, Syria.
We have an overabundance of “useful idiots” here in the states. We have the media. We have the aforementioned neoliberal agenda. What you don't see at first glance is what has become the most useful idiot in the arsenal. Its there in plain sight; you just have to squint a bit to see it.
Don't turn on your TV to see the idiots in plain view. That revelation won't be televised. The reality is “terrorism” has become the most easily exploited geopolitical hot potato of modern times. Kick em when you're up; sick em them when you're down. Or flip it around; it all works the same.
It didn't have to be all the #FakeNews pouring out of eastern Aleppo BEFORE it was taken by Assad and Syrian army as the city celebrated Christmas for the first time in four years. Funny that wasn't on CNN. Must have missed it. It didn't take Syrian special forces to capture and officially name Western operatives last month facilitating the likes of ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra, for us to know who we were betting on. How we aided and funded Wahhabist and neo-Wahhabist extremists in their attempts to implement an Islamic theocracy at the expense of a democratically elected secular nation. Let that soak in. Let that hit your palate. Got a taste for it now? Do you taste the notes of hypocrisy, deception and a hint of callousness in it? A democratic republic, the self-described beacon of light on the hill in the darkness of the world.
A benevolent nation (thank you ScottL) government who traded its sensibilities and soul in for more geopolitical power and less freedom. At least DADDY gets it...
As CNN and the like reported the civilians running away from the encircling Assad armies aided by Russian airstrikes in Aleppo last month they flipped the script. It was the civilians fleeing from 4 years of control by Islamic extremists, running from “moderate rebels” held in east Aleppo. But just where were they running to? The report never had that destination outcome. Interestingly enough, that report did tell us how the media are unable to cross the front-line into northern/western Syria. Funny way to gather info and intel to build a story, no? Journalism through 2nd and 3rd channels isn't journalism anymore. Its at the mercy of whoever can control said sources. This often leads to propaganda. A simply connection of the dots can tell you where they were running and fleeing to. It was none other than the Syrian government, who held a peaceful western Aleppo just a few miles away. Consider this TV report on the fleeing civilians from CNN via Fred Pleitgen:
CIVILIANS FLEE AS SYRIAN ARMY POUNDS ALEPPO
That headline is totally misleading for a myriad of reasons. Strange it is, the narrative here at home is not reporting the truth. People are fleeing a place being bombed to the people responsible for the bombing? They want you to believe the east, where our “moderates” are aided and backed by the US and its allies are fighting for freedom in favor of the citizens of Aleppo; when it could not be further from the truth. East Aleppo, the place where a kid is surrounded and beheaded by “moderates”. Those “moderates” known as the Nour al-Din al-Zinki Movement were given arms and support by our State Department headed by the infamous and nefarious demon of death herself, one Hillary Clinton. This is in a place where:
hundreds of east Aleppo militiamen prevented at rifle-point thousands of civilians from fleeing their enclave over the past two weeks, how they shot dead six people, including a pregnant woman.
In a place, where cowards shouting "Allahu akbar" used civilians and their residences as shields from bombings. What a great God they have. And the Western media was along for the ride if you just exclude the fact they didn't have the balls to get in the car and be there in person. There might not a better recap and list of media lies and propaganda on east Aleppo, Syria than the piece written by Rania Khalek of Fair.org.
We have seen this play out in Libya as well. Defined by the West on its watch lists as “extremists” but used by the West openly as useful idiots in the pursuit of regime change against a secular middle eastern nation. If we are to engage and our goal is to eradicate these extremist groups then lets do so. What we can't have is this posture where we allow ourselves to arm these extremists over democratically elected leaders. It sends a mixed message and is ineffective.
All of this is lies at the feet and the blood on the hands of the prince of peace himself, the neoliberals anointed one, Mr. Barack Hussein Obama. Mr. Nobel Peace Prize. A President of the United States who won the Nobel Peace Prize before he even stepped into office. The same man who burst onto the scene under the guise of transparency. Who ran a campaign against nation building and regime changes. The same man who would come to execute more drone strikes than his predecessor. A man who would choose to arm radical Islam over nations with democratically elected governments. What happened? Did he do an 180 because he wanted to or was he just doing what he was told?
He was the man who once said back in ‘08;
"one important thing is that we not get mission creep"
There was no congressional authorization for launching air raids in Syria. There was no authorization in Libya either you know what started out as a “humanitarian effort” to only become another “Moderate” extremist-backed “resistance” that ended up with the Muslim brotherhood filling the vacuum. I think mission creep has all but been executed at 100% capacity, Mr. Obama.
This leads me to my questions:
How do we get to a point where we are supporting the elimination of democracy at the hands of extreme Muslim terror?
All of a sudden an extreme Sunni/Wahhabism hybrid decides to enter Aleppo as liberators? Despite every conquest by these actors has been extreme and violent to the natives they confront.
Why would Al-Assad enter Aleppo to butcher citizens (as some reported) while it was being held by these “terrorists” in a city of mixed ethnicities and religions who before the uprising lived side by side in peace under Assad?
Why do we support a nation like Saudi Arabia? A nation led by Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdul-Aziz ibn Abdullah Al ash-Sheikh whom has declared Sunni Islam as enemies and wants to purify the Sunni sect or you could also say 80% of Islam. All this despite the fact Wahhabism is the overwhelming majority of “terrorists”?
Why do all of our end results in the middle east we engage in result in destabilization? There are plenty of options for answers but the conclusions to be drawn from these options are about as fuzzy as the reasoning for these actions I laid out in my questioning. I have written about the petrodollar many many times but that might be just part of the story. If there is one thing we do know, Mr. Obama your legacy is clear: we want our award back. See, I know YOU think you deserved the award without merit DESPITE the fact that you were the polar opposite of peace. And its this entitlement that makes you the poster boy for the infamous cultural suicide we embrace today; the participation trophy. Nevertheless, Nobel committee secretary Geir Lundestad finally sees it like I see it (sort of). As he wrote in his memoir: "Secretary of Peace. 25 years with the Nobel Prize" ...
"thought it would strengthen Obama and it didn't have this effect."
"In hindsight, we could say that the argument of giving Obama a helping hand was only partially correct,"
"Even many of Obama's supporters believed that the prize was a mistake,"
"In that sense, the committee didn't achieve what it had hoped for"
The continent of Africa has been in the news quite a bit of late and it's been a mixed bag of reasons why. Economically speaking, there has been astonishing progress and growth in emerging markets like Angola, who has seen its GDP increase over 1000% since 2000. There has also been a major boom in China and African trade agreements, as more and more African nations are brokering deals to send their vast resources into the commodity starved eastern power. George Clooney was arrested protesting at the Sudanese Embassy in Washington for the ongoing civil war that is ravishing the nation. Then we have had the blitz of KONY 12 the last few weeks and the bizarre twist, in which we seen the creator of the viral sensation get arrested for creating a scene in public naked and belligerent.
The most fascinating aspect of KONY 12 wasn’t the astounding
swath of attention through social networking then subsequent conventional
media. It wasn't Jason Russell's public meltdown caught on camera. Nor was it the removal of an African warlord, because even when he was arrested, somebody would fill the vacuum. No, the
single most important aspect of this “movement” is something nobody is talking
about and that is the American public double standard.
For over a decade now, we have all at one time or another
heard the world Islam and it immediately became synonymous with the word
terrorism. I have done it. We see it in person, in the media (all facets of the
media) and every other aspect of our lives. It’s only human to do so,
considering the coverage and the emotional impact a 9-11 will have on a country.
When you add the fighting of two wars to defeat terrorism, it only adds to the cognitive
dissonance we experience as a whole.
However, an open mind and a clean motive will allow you to
understand that Islam, like any other widespread religion, is for the most part,
made up of peaceful, good natured people. If we take the 1.5+ billion people whom
call themselves Muslims, it is mathematically unavoidable to not have some bad
apples. We have seen just 19 Hijackers on 9-11 send the world into a tailspin.
We have heard of just 75-100 people alone taking on the US military in
Afghanistan. To this day that has us still counting losses in blood and treasure. Economically, the
cost being somewhere in the hundreds of billions. In the form of life, priceless.
It is expected and highly probable to have a small
percentage of people be violent and/or suicidal by human nature alone. Then suppose you factor in
degrading aspects like: lack of education, no commerce to provide steady work
or access to true representative government… the numbers of bad apples only swell.
And that is where we find the disconnect in our rational.
Here we have a tyrant, named Joseph Kony, who leads the Lord’s
Resistance Army. That “Lord” at the forefront of the acronym isn’t some arbitrary
name for a gang. It means what it does in Uganda,
as it does here. That "Lord" being the very same as the Jedeo-Christian "Lord". Joseph Kony is the mastermind of a guerrilla war against the Ugandan government (whom are Muslim’s) as
he is hell bent on installing a theocracy ruled by the Ten Commandments; to
replace the Islamic theocracy already in place. Where have we seen this movie
before? Oh yhea, it’s called the Crusades.
Dont tell that to people like Rush Limbaugh though. He actually went on his radio program trying to politicize the situation last year after Obama sent in 100 troops to "to remove them from the battlefield". Now I personally don't agree in any military engagements in Sudan or Uganda, but i also don't defend a guy like Joseph Kony because it's politically expedite either. Now Rush Limbaugh later apologized for it days later but the damage was done. Here you have in Rush, a Christian-Conservative defending Joseph Kony based on the fact that he was a Christian, without even so much of a thought who or what he has done.
That is the type of mindset many of us here in the states use when the subject of religion comes up regarding Islam. What Limbaugh did was a microcosm of what most of us have done and many of us still do, we relate Terrorism to Islam and Christianity to righteousness. Even though Kony himself is a terrorist responsible for countless murders, executions and war crimes - it was assumed at face value he being a Christian, he was "fighting the good fight". Now most people who watched the video seen him for whom he was but the fact that he was calling himself a Christian goes relatively unnoticed, while anytime a brown person commits an act of terrorism, his relgion is bundled alongside his actions.
Just like many self described Christians, such as Jim Jones
and David Koresh, their acts don’t jive with the overwhelming majority of
Christians. Could those two and Joseph Kony actually find biblical evidence and
accounts justifying their actions? Sure. The Old Testament is littered with
stories or commands to kill non believers amongst other heinous acts. One of
the most telling comes from Deuteronomy (13:7-12 NAB):
If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or
your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other
gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near
at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to
him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but
kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of
the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because
he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of
the land of Egypt,
that place of slavery. And all Israel,
hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst.
Now, many of you are probably saying to yourself, well those
laws were for Jewish people and those were their laws... and you would be correct.
However, the Bible doesn’t come with a disclaimer and if it is truly the word
of God, why should it? And if it is simply a case of “lost in translation” like
many parts of the Bible when something controversial comes up (funny how that
problem never arises with the messages of eternal love and forgiveness) why would God trust man in the first place? Why trust an obvious fallible messenger to be the courier of his word, if he cant even copy the word from one sheet of paper to the next without error? That however is another discussion for another day.
So, because books like the Bible and the Koran are obviously open to interpretation, you will always have people for a myriad of reasons
using these books as a tool (consciously or subconsciously) to justify or promote
what they read literally. Most Christians do not do this. Just as most Muslims do not. However,
many here in the states, seem to lose sight of that.
The Koran has many passages where it talks of peace with “people
of the book” meaning Christians and Jews. Yet some Muslims choose to find other
passages that contradict those passages in favor of something more hostile, because
it suits or justifies their means to an end. Just as what happens with some Christians
and their relation with the Bible. There is plenty of uplifting and spiritual enriching
lessons to be found in both books, but like the Koran (and YouTube) there is dark places to
go and find the justification for almost anything you want.
So, if we are to condemn Joseph Kony as a murder and support (and i do) that he is someone
who should be found and put to death based on his actions and nothing else, fine. If
we are to ignore his motives and his faith as a Christian, separating them from
his cruel and ruthless actions, fine again. Then, it is only logical we treat Muslim
extremists the same way.
Its 1391 in Iran,
you best pass on that grass; if you want to save your ass. It is literally 1391
according to Iran’s
calendar, and here I thought I was always a contrarian? Back in 76' when we were celebrating our bi-centennial the last Shah of Iran (see 1953 US led coup) flipped the calendar from 1355 to 2535... overnight! The
Persians, well, they apparently take contrarianism to another level. Obviously the irony
of that difference in centuries isn’t lost on me when I seen this headline in
the Washington Post last night:
My first thought was “well, Iran
is trying to reduce gasoline usage” but I figured that was even too drastic for
this regime… but not too far off. As I read I was surprised to learn that:
1. The executions are in
public for everyone to see.
2. About 80 percent of
the executions involved drug offenses and many were minors.
3. Iran’s Penal Code
make demonstrations, public debate and the formation of groups deemed a threat to ‘national security’
punishable by prison or death
What jumped off the page was that drug offenses are
the overwhelming majority of the executions. But that doesnt touch the ludicrous notion of sentencing minors to death, i mean wow. I would continue but I think there
isn’t much else to be said. Public debate is one of the many offenses that could be cause for
a stoning or hanging… writing this blog and you reading it could be two acts
that were punishable by death. Does this not seem like something taken out of
the dark ages?? Circa 1391??
It makes sense though. Drugs and public debate (both
offenses) would open up some eyes resulting in a formation of groups (also an
offense) of like minded “awoken” people and before you know it, national security would be threatened. You would have yourselves another Arab spring
uprising. While I don’t agree, I can see the Iranians reasoning. Had anyone
have the insight and organization it would end that theocracy resulting in
public executions of the publicly “elected” leaders. Basically, its a little
C.Y.O.A.
This had me thinking about our nation and it dawned on me that some people would prefer a government that blends their faith here in the states. Take Slick Rick, Santorum actually said this week he doesn't believe in the "absolute separation of church and state". While some might rationalize this or explain it the bottom line is any type of religious beliefs should always be excluded because religion isn't exactly inclusive. Its been the basis for a few conflicts over time. You will always have people that will become disenfranchised and government cannot be in the business of playing favorites or picking winners (hahaha).
The overwhelming majority of Muslims are peaceful souls, but there is a small percentage of them and a high percentage of them running entire nations that use pieces of the Koran to justify horrendous acts. There is also rouge groups of men that use the Koran to endorse and carry out terrorist acts. Now, superimpose that here if we didn't have the separation of church and state or if we started chipping way at that now.
The overwhelming majority of Christians are peaceful souls but there is that 800 lb crazy book in the room like the Muslim version, but older... and with a sequel starring a pretty cool hippie with a sandals. Being Slick Rick is Christian; have you ever read Deuteronomy or Exodus? Imagine if someone started bringing those books to capital hill for show n tell? Gee, i hope they wouldn't pick out the parts concerning the murder of unbelievers (yikes). Praise God, we have the separation of church and state.
Is Iran
a threat? Are they a threat to the US?
Are they are threat to her allies? Is Iran
a threat to the region? The answer to these questions are all, yes, they are.
However, they are a threat for different reasons to each entity. Israel
has long had problems with Iran.
It’s well documented and that will never cease; at least not in our lifetimes.
The Middle East region is very complicated and convoluted. With the Arab Spring now working
its way into other totalitarian regimes, established dictators and theocracy’s, the
region remains sensitive to any waves. Iran
is the most powerful state left in the Middle East. They
are predominately Shi’a Muslim’s (85%) while the rest of the region is overwhelmingly
Sunni Muslim (90%). If we remember the problems with the US
invasion and subsequent occupation of Iraq,
it was complications of various religious sects and the sectarian violence that ensued because of those divisions, was what caused the greatest problems.
Religion was also in part the basis for Iraq’s
invasion of Iran
in 1980 that lasted eight bloody years resulting in over 1 Million deaths. This
was the same war that the US
backed Saddam’s Sunni invasion supplying both weapons and intelligence to Iraq
in proxy war against the Shi’a Iranians. It was during and after the Iraq
invasion that Iran
became more isolated the ever before and when you include they speak a different
language (Persian) and have another belief system from their neighbors; it only
compounded the isolation.
Recently, there was the wikileaks cable that quoted Saudi
Ambassador to the US,
Adel al-Jubeir recalling King Abdullah of Saudi
Arabia urging the US
to attack Iran’s
nuclear program. To quote “cut the head off the snake (Iran)”. Last month, Saudi Oil Minister, Ali al-Naimi, said that the Kingdom will be able to make -up for any shortfall if Iran remains in a defensive posture; further indicating their approval for regime change.
"It is because of our ongoing investment that Saudi Arabia is able to
respond to shortages around the world - take issues with Libyan
production last year for example. 'And it's because of our investment that any future shortages will be handled."
In fact, most Arab nations do not receive the Iranians well and do not want
them to go nuclear. The Arab League has isolated Syria
(Iran’s only
ally) as it has halted both diplomatic and economic ties with
the nation. If that wasnt enough of a statement they will lend political and material support to
the Syrian opposition. It appears Syria
will come to some type of regime change similar to what happened in Egypt and Libya.
The Arab spring is said to be based on freedom of individuals and elections are
a part of that; if and when the revolution takes power, it will not replace the
leadership of Assad with a pro Iranian government.
What is happening is Iran
is walking the proverbial plank. They have no allies. Everyone around them
either wants their leadership removed or they simply don’t care either way. Both
bordering nations of Iran
have been vaporized by the United States.
Its only logical that another member of the “Axis of evil” stuck smack dab in
the middle of US occupations is next.
They know it and they also know they only have a few cards
to play. First, they must go nuclear BEFORE an attack, being that a nuclear
nation has yet to be attacked by the United
States. Will this deter them from being
attacked by the West? Nobody can say for sure, but it will at least give them
pause and possibly buy the Iranians more time. Secondly, and the Ace of Spades,
is that they will divorce themselves from the dollar.
With the drumbeat of war ratcheting up from the US
to heights not seen since 2002, Iran,
like its neighbor Iraq
once did, is poised to play chicken with the US
and its European allies engaging the US
in economic war. The first strike was launched by the US
in new sanctions signed by President Obama back in December and there was a
response by Tehran with a threat to
close the Strait of Hormuz.
Now, we have Belgium-based
SWIFT - who is a lifeline to international trade, as they oversee an average
of 18 million payment messages per day between banks in 210 countries prepared to cut off Iran,
virtually forcing international trade with Iran
to a standstill. This is a remarkable revelation and a clear indication of the
clout the US
still carries as the reserve currency of international trade. Never, has SWIFT
removed a nation since its inception in 1973.
"Kicking Iran
out of SWIFT is both unprecedented and another dangerous step toward turning a
financial war into a military conflict," said Reza Marashi, National
Iranian American Council's research director.
Not only does this hurt all Iranians, but more importantly it
hurts Iran’s
military as well. Without fuel you cannot mobilize your military and logistics
become impossible. Logistical failure has been the downfall of some of them
most important conflicts of the last 300 years and with Iran
being economically cut off it would inevitable. While Iran maybe the 3rd
largest supplier of crude in the world, it’s also relying on 40% of its petroleum and diesel consumption to come way of imports due to both refinery
dysfunction /inefficiencies and just flat out a shortage of new refineries. That however is being addressed and eventually Iran will not be so dependable on importing gasoline but yet still vulnerable if those refineries were knocked offline.
At one point, Iran was planning on getting out of the dollar as early as 2002 (if not long before) and
then Iraq (who
tried getting out of the dollar in 2000 after a decade of sanctions) got
blitzed and Tehran went eerily
silent. Then a few years later and coincidentally enough with the US
bogged down in two stagnate/unpopular wars... Tehran
began chatting aloud about dumping the dollar again. It was The Iranian Oil Bourse, created in 2008, that set the stage for this showdown that will
officially end the petrol-dollar relationship with Iranian crude oil beginning on March 20, 2012. That is just a little
over a month to go.
Now that we are facing our own debt problems, drawing down
from Iraq and Afghanistan
and have a President who may be perceived as weak, the Iranians threw down the
gauntlet. What are we to do? All this adds up to one thing and that is why
we are seeing a strong military presence in the Middle East,
coupled with tough talk from talking heads here in the states. I see a major
push to invoke war with the Iranians.
I've always felt and said that nuclear weapons and terrorism
have always been more of a perceived threat then an actual threat concerning the
Middle East. 9-11 was the exception and it wasn't state
sponsored either. Are nuclear weapons that much of a threat to warrant all this
attention? I have my reservations. Iran
has plenty of nations around them that don't particularly care for them and are
nuked up as well, and those that don’t posses nuclear capability's, I assume would be more then happy to have nukes
from the US/West planted on their soil as a deterrent.
Iran
maybe a nutty regime but mutual destruction is a deterrent to even the crazies,
no matter how much “cooze” Allah can (sic) promise. It’s simply a self
contained regional situation in spite of what the saber wavers might otherwise
say, even if they did get nukes. The idea of supporting terrorist and getting
nukes however is easier for people to grasp then how the Petrodollar recycling
machine works and its more inline with the average person’s moral views: good
vs evil is easier to understand vs then say what it really is and that is the Machiavellian battle of high vs low mach, or
some might say survival of the fittest.
Hell, the majority of the country does not even
believe in natural selection!? Can you really blame our government for running
with the: 'scary dudes in turbans, armed with rocket launchers and hiding in
caves reading Korans under camp fires - alongside a gaggle of virgins, who also want to
nuke you…because they hate you, because you are free' story?
That's where this web gets tangled. See, as Americans we like our standard of living. Is it inflated? Is it driven purely by consumption and debt? Is it made possible by a rigged game that allows us to trade pieces of paper for all types of goods and commodities that the rest of the world has to break their backs for? The answer to those questions is also - yes.
If it was just about nuclear weapons we would have eliminated North Korea's capability's long ago. If it was about terrorism, we would have went after our own allies like Saudi Arabia or never would have clandestinely funded so many right-wing gorilla operations in Latin and South America the last 50 years. Anyone that threatened to flip the monopoly board over and not participate (and publicly denounce the petrodollar) in the petrodollar scheme and trade with other currencies, has already been or will be (Hugo Chavez) neutralized. From Libya - Iraq - former IMF chair Dominique Strauss-Kahn and now Iran.
With the Petrodollar recycling process being the single -
most vital element to the United States
hegemony, it is imperative and absolutely essential that nations (see OPEC)
continue to exchange their oil for US dollars. Or, the world as we know it here
in the States will be much different... and not for the better. You can rest assured, that we will be putting a boot up the Ayatollahs ass and carpet bombing the Caucasus before our leaders (see corporations) allow us to fall into that state.
Interesting story i seen on Huffington Post yesterday pertaining to Dr Ron Paul attracting Muslim support, or as the articles headline points out:
Muslims Say Ron Paul Is Their Kind Of Republican
Now this was not a piece written by the Huff-Post, but rather by a reporter from Religion News Service named Omar Sacirbey, who covers Islam for the organization. It was a story written around the opinions of three people who were presented to be of Islamic faith. One was a convert to Islam in her 50's named Adolf (no joke) and the other two were:
An 18 year old who said he like Paul because "is the only candidate willing to get tough with Israel." Now that was the authors viewpoint of this 18 year old, those were never his words in the report.
The other, was a man named Rizwan Kadir, a financial consultant in suburban Chicago who voted for Obama (imagine that) in '08 but who now say's he is "very disappointed." Just not enough to give up his support for Obama this year... at least not yet: "If it came down to him and Obama, I don't know," Kadir said.
Nowhere in this piece was anything (statistically speaking) that would indicate Muslim support for Dr Paul is of anything of significance. Maybe there is such support; you just wouldn't know it from this report. The problem is, if its just three people giving thier viewpoints and/or "four 'Muslims for Ron Paul' Facebook pages" or if one of those 3 people aren't even sure they will be VOTING FOR DR PAUL... its not an accurate depiction of the title. In fact, i don't know how a middle school newspaper could approve this of being newsworthy... but there you have it.
Obvious question is, why? Could it be Dr Ron Paul's Foreign Policies are quite controversial in Conservative ranks? Could it be an overwhelming majority of Republican candidates support a war with Iran? Could it be the uneasy topic of Muslim and terrorism and how many US citizens automatically correlate the two? Could it be the crack pot crazy uncle Ron is attracting the gutter once again, like the storm-fronters and 9-11 inside job camp? We have seen this narrative before and the more it goes on the more desperate those drumming up this hogwash look.
I for one, have no issue with Muslim Americans supporting Dr Paul. In fact, I welcome it. Liberty and freedom appeal to all demographics and Muslims that want the same should vote for Dr Paul because he represents just that. However, this tells the reader nothing about this. The Huffington makes no secret of where they butter they're bread. For a website and news-source that has more left turns than Talladega in early May... i find it curious the lengths they too have gone to drive "the agenda". Makes you have to say, hmmm?
This week, NASA unveiled a new strategy…public relations. That’s right; our brightest minds in not just aerospace but some of the sharpest in the country are now set to tackle the task of: re-inspiring children, expanding our international relationships and last but not least…reaching out to the Muslim world.
That’s right, the same commander in chief who defunded the constellation project to get us back to the moon by 2020 (you know its only been 38 years since our last visit) and start making progress again in what would have to be called a very disappointingly flat program in terms of growth and scientific advances. The same commander in chief that PolitiFact researcher Louis Jacobson said “dramatically broke with recent space policy -- and in so doing, he broke one of his campaign promises". But what do you expect, from a President who wants private enterprise to be more involved with NASA while the government overtakes healthcare, essentially flopping roles… now wants NASA to engage in “winning the hearts and minds”.
Is NASA equipped to engage in these PR missions? Im not sure, but the smart money is leave the space stuff to the space guys and the PR stuff to the PR guys. But hey, when you have a government running actual businesses and firing CEO’s or reaching out to a population with an open scientific hand that is generally controlled by theocracy’s stuck in the dark ages whom reject science or humanity…does anything really make sense anymore? Can we really look at these Muslim nations and praise their work in mathematics and contributions to science when they haven’t made any since the industrial revolution? What’s next off to Italy and praise them for the Roman accomplishments? Why not reach out to Spain and thank them for their work in the naval game?
This is a population that doesn’t educate half their population because of gender. It’s a population where same sex relationships are illegal. Populations where pornography and women not being dressed from head to toe are all punishable by law. It’s a population that through its leaders and religious gurus have kept a good chunk of their civilizations in the dark ages. Its obvious President Obama wants to engage this population in other ways besides the gun, although he doesn’t mind that route either. But is this really possible? Can you reach out with logic to a person of faith and convince them that logic and reason are beneficial?
The Enlightenment gave us our revolution and our liberty and that spurned our technology and our way of life. Through this we evolved socially as well. What Obama wants is what we all want… moderate Muslim nations that will start to evolve into democratically elected nations. But, it’s not likely to happen if the leaders of these nations have their say. Enlightenment for them would mean the end of their power. So, one asks to ask himself is it better to knock on doors and “hope” or is it more productive to clean your house, and lead by example? America needs to get back to being the shining beacon of hope but not by wishing upon a star… but instead by reaching for them.
