The post 9-11 double-sided coin

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.

Interesting piece that someone brought to my attention via email courtesy Twitter.This was the poster:

@Samuel_E_Amer

Sam Amer January 12, 2012

"GOP leaders want Ron Paul to lose" by JOHN KASS , Chicago Tribune

With the Iowa caucuses just a few days away, the Republican establishment is busy with some frightening new themes, like:

What happens in Iowa stays in Iowa.

Or: Who cares what happens in Iowa anyway?

My favorite comes direct from the unyielding mind of Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, a Republican who insists that American voters don't care which candidate wins the Iowa caucuses Jan. 3.

"People are going to look at who comes in second and who comes in third," said Branstad. "If [Mitt] Romney comes in a strong second, it definitely helps him going into New Hampshire and other states."

Losing Iowa helps in New Hampshire? So it's not winning that counts, it's losing? What the?

Is he high?

Republican bigwig minds can't be besotted by Hopium. That's a liberal Democratic leaf for Democratic pipes depressed that Chicago's City Hall has run the country into the ground.

No, Republicans must be smoking something else, something just as potent: Dopium, a leaf so powerful that it allowed many Republicans to call themselves "conservatives" while embracing a series of big-government programs and federal bailouts from the Bush administration, not to mention two wars.

Gov. Branstad isn't alone. The entire Republican establishment is babbling similar nonsense about the importance of being earnest -- and a loser in Iowa.

Meanwhile, the Republican-media high priests are now in full-throated roar. From the secular pulpits they predict unending torment and Obamanation for anyone foolish enough to embrace the current heretical teachings.

And the name of this heretic? Ron Paul, the Texas congressman and libertarian who is leading most polls in Iowa with a message of cutting government, including the defense budget, and staying out of wars.

The problem isn't that he's saying it. Paul has been consistent for years. The problem for the GOP establishment is that the American people are now listening.

And this threatens the coalition that can put Karl Rove and Wall Street and the religious right at the same table to slice the pie of power.

The fact that voters, particularly younger voters, are edging toward Paul has sent the GOP into a panic.

"His supporters are younger and more likely to [use] a cellphone, so he's probably going to perform better than his polling suggests," Iowa State associate professor Dave Peterson told cbsnews.com. "His supporters are also dedicated and will likely turn out on caucus night and not change their minds."

Republicans sure changed their minds about Mitt Romney, a moderate who yearns to be conservative during party primaries. Republicans pegged him for what he is, a corporate stiff, every hair in place, who'll run left the second he secures the nomination.

Tim Pawlenty? Just another can of Spam. Rick Perry stuck both boots in his mouth and kept them there. It's a wonder he has any lips left.

Michele Bachmann had her troubles with American history, and Rick Santorum seems ready to punch anyone who won't let him attack Iran tomorrow morning.

And Herman Cain? With so many "girlfriend" stories buzzing around him, he was tagged on the Internet with an M.C. Hammer-type parody theme song: "Cain Touched This."

Now it's Newt Gingrich's turn to drop his blossoms. What was it exactly?

That $1.6 million chunk that his consulting firm took from federal mortgage giant Freddie Mac as it was getting a massive federal bailout? Or that pledge of marital fidelity he signed the other day, suggesting that his oath to his third wife wasn't nearly enough?

Since August, the media has desperately avoided mentioning Paul. I'm not endorsing him here. But you'd have to be blind not to see Republican bosses in panic. Because if Paul wins Iowa, his ideas might catch fire.

Once there was no more amusing sight for me than watching Democratic mouthpieces appearing on TV, claiming then-Sen. Barack Obama, D-Rezko -- backed by all those guys from Chicago's City Hall -- would bring hope and change as he transcended the broken politics of America's past.

The journalistic high priests, their brains swollen by several bowls of Hopium, chattered and repeated the slogans of City Hall's favorite mouthpiece, David Axelrod.

So Americans never quite realized that the man they were electing president had been an earnest but inexperienced back-bencher in the Illinois Legislature who spent his entire career taking orders from machine bosses while trying to get ahead.

Hopium was bad enough. But what worries me are all those clouds of Dopium wafting across Iowa.

Republicans Money(ball) problem

Its often said that Ron Paul has no chance to capture the nomination, and its said so much by so many people in all types of media that there is no need to rehash it. We get it. He is too old, too kooky, to outside of the mainstream and his delivery and appearance isn’t presidential enough.

Every time I hear Ron Paul doesn’t have the appearance to become elected President much less elected the Republican nomination I always think of the quote from the book Moneyball. Right before the amateur draft the GM and his scouts are in a room debating players. Oakland A’s GM Billy Bean is squabbling back and forth with a typical player with an older scout, who finally just says the player doesn’t have the body to be a ballplayer.

Frustrated Beane tells his scouts: “ we're not selling jeans here”.

The book Moneyball is a lot like the current GOP. It’s a good ‘ol boy network of establishment brand names vetted by the press and by the power structure that’s calls itself the RNC. It’s the party of Grover Norquist and Karl Rove. It’s the party that panders to big business and social conservatives or basically anyone that will guarantee groups of people who will be pulling Republican levers down come election days. And lest not be confused, it’s not limited to Republicans. The Democrat’s establishment is just as guilty if not more. You see, the Republican establishment only has one network pandering to it.

Appearance is everything. Content is only credible if it is sellable. With that said, you can get people like Romney or Rick Perry to be in the spotlight. Rick Perry, much like Newt Gingrich is a career politician and both are without question RINO’s. Even Perry at one point was an elected Democrat before he “seen the light”, conveniently after he voted for a 5.7 Billion dollar tax increase in the Texas State legislature. But that doesn’t matter. They are egotistical maniacs who will do whatever a focus group tells them to do that make them look favorable in way or another. Perry might not be so much like this, but he has Jesus on his side, so that works too... that’s sellable.

What about Mitt Romney? If there is anyone that is more fallible to waffling, it’s the Mitt. Nobody has been for more after he was against it. Hes a wet dream for the RNC and Fox and whoever else likes a happy meal - Manchurian candidate. He is good looking, articulate, from Big business and has lots of well connected friends. Mitt has always and will continue to be the golden boy of the establishment Republicans and you cant fault them for that. He’s the ideal company man, the good - trusty servant. But he doesn’t serve your interests, he serves their interests.

That’s where this gets interesting. The book Moneyball was based around new versus old ideas. Modern technology versus the naked eye. That’s exactly what is happening in the Republican Party as we speak. We are seeing the old players; the Limbaughs and the Romneys and Bushes and John MCains of the country vehemently oppose the most conservative man not only in congress but in any federal branch of government for that matter. Because it petrifies them, they might not understand it, why they discount him but its simple. Their brand will be toast. They will not be as viable.

Ron Paul wants to put an end to crony capitalism and corporate welfare. He wants to shrink big government. Everything he wants to do is for freedom. That is republicanism at its core. With a limited government why raise taxes or fight endless wars? If you have a limited government how can you attempt to control and govern morality? You can’t. So if government has less control then that means someone has more and they don’t want that. Give the power back to the electorate; after all the work to strip them of that power? Dig in Mr Paul because if these tired, token and cyclical racists’ newsletters from the early 90’s are any indication; you’re going to get the kitchen sink.