A reasoning to barrage all feeling

There is no denying that I am wretched in my hopelessness. I know myself, weaknesses and strengths, and I deny neither, including my ignorance in many aspects of the world. I have no shame of that because it will be mended with time. But do not misunderstand, I do not despise or even really dislike any of these religious people I’ve never met, and the ones I have met are the same. It is simply having no respect for religion. Introduction out of the way, I do not base my reasons on anything except my understanding of how life, bipedal animals alike four legged ones, lives. Animals have one motive for acting, one’s own well-being, and I love to see people attempt to argue this, so please don’t. Usually this is put together with happiness, with Anglo-Saxons and Christians, at least. But this self-proclaimed terrorist (“in other words, i am a terrorist and have carried out terrorist attacks”) – ha-ha… I still know not the gender of this generous Syrian, whose title from here on is self-proclaimed terrorist… is right that I do not know very many religious non-Christian people, which I mentioned but am still rightfully criticized on. But with the exception of about three people everyone I know is some type of Christian, but I did misspeak that is,  there is one devout person I know and a few I know of. Devoutness, however, has little significance because like I said religious beliefs are simply not, in my eyes, respectable. However, again, I did leave out a very large reason why religion is so greatly popular, and that is conditioning; generations of five year olds being told “knowing God is the paramount in life,” in terms a five year old might comprehend.  I do not believe in any biblical God, and am uncertain about a supreme creator. But it’s simple, science, even though just as unproven as religion, says that the universe was created a certain way. That the sun came about like this and the Earth like that, and in my opinion these things area more reasonable than God’s way, and say that it’s all too much trouble for an all-knowing Lord to do something specifically for mankind. Now the narrator lost his or her place when saying: “…when [Muslims] say that we know God – as an Infinite Being – does not need our paltry acts of worship, but that He tells us to do these things for our own good.” Maybe the Self-Proclaimed Terrorist did not lose his or her train of thought; maybe I simply do not understand what was meant and I am missing the independent clause to follow the dependent clause, nevertheless the error, whose ever it might be, is a shame. But the Self-Proclaimed Terrorist’s response is commonly heard. It states what is believed, which being informed is not bad, but it is not as good as being told why what’s believed is believed and how he or she personally came to belief it. Anyhow to counter the insult of my making an assumption about a group of people whilst being entirely unfamiliar with that group, which entirely contradicts the given advice, I know a good amount of Christians. That is, it’s pretty recognized that in the South morals are much more prevalent (the exaggeration is chivalry as well as the devout, readily used example, of “people will just walk by someone getting mugged in New York, but in Texas there’d be four guys pounding on the mugger within seconds”) I Don’t necessary agree with those but I do know that the north is more heavily liberal, and obviously there are religious liberals, but there are more religious conservatives, by the definition of liberal and conservative… so it’s only logical that there would be more devout Christians here than the advised place to visit, in the Northern United States.  

“in christianity you can find hypocrites and fakes, and you can find sincere pious ones.” – Of course there is diversity within groups of people, but I could make the argument that American people as a whole are apathetic, and apathy is not a pious quality, being that Christians probably dilute this fact. Now, call me stupid, but I do not understand why religion is so popular unless it makes those that belief what their religion teaches, feel a sense of wholeness, somewhat epic. I view religious beliefs as low, weak, because of the desperate need for meaning, as if we were alive and living for a devout purpose. The most powerful entity in this unimaginably large universe has a purpose for us, so we must be important. I just don’t buy into all of that. There is no motive for it, yes again with the motives, and yes I understand the argument God is Godly and I would not be able to comprehend His ways, which are more than likely motiveless. But I’ve no conflict with being too simple to have faith in something simply on the premise that I can’t understand or imagine it. To make reference to the Self-Proclaimed Terrorist’s quotation, I have no concern about being worth what comes out of my stomach; I’ll be the first to confirm such.               Now getting into History and events in the world; it won’t be as fun because the Self-Proclaimed Terrorist has a good argument. Let me make something clear. A nation is not responsible for its history.
America did not drop a nuclear bomb on
Japan. Why do I say this obviously incorrect statement? Because no one ruling the country then is still doing so now, and when I say
America I mean the current American Government. When I made the statement, “I’ve noticed that these diplomats from Syria and Iran try to say Israel and America is guilty of doing what they themselves are guilty of, which I have to commend is a pretty damn good strategy.”   I was referring to ambassadors’, ministers, diplomats like in the quote, recent comments. Not anything that has been done when different people were running the Governments in both said countries. Not to mention I believe you misread what I’d said. I said
Iran (the nation, the rulers of the nation) is doing something, denying it but also accusing its enemy of doing what they are denying doing but actually are doing. Basically like Sheik Hassan Nasrallah calling
Israel terrorists because the Israeli bombs are killing Lebanese civilians, when actually Hezbollah is closer to terrorism with their targeting Israeli civilians, or if one would prefer just shooting rockets but not targeting anything really.  Or Imad Moustapha saying that the “media channels” providing coverage to the “American audience” is distorting the situation, when there are numerous news agencies confirming everything
Israel but especially
Britain and
America do, but only one confirming Hezbollah and Lebanon, which has discredited itself quite a bit of having a bias. Or the indirect Iranian ambassador to Lebanon, Fouad Siniora, saying that Hezbollah getting crushed was bad for Lebanon because Hezbollah is the resistance of Lebanon, when actually it is the plague of Lebanon and Israel is more her protector than Hezbollah. ” when have
Syria and
Iran invaded other countries and overthrown democratically elected governments??” –
Syria occupied
Lebanon and was blamed for the assassination of Rafik Hariri, to name the most well known.

“
America has supported dictatorial regimes in almost all Middle Eastern countries (no they are not Islamic countries). When have
Syria and
Iran installed their puppets in
America and
Israel, and offered support to any tyrant they’ve placed in
America, or overthrew any democratically elected president of the
US?? or “forced democracy” upon America and Israel at the point of the gun and with the threat of violence and war and “shock and awe” campaigns, or bullied the UN into enacting sanctions lasting for years against countries, causing the death of millions of children (such as in Iraq alone).”

All of these comments about Israel and America despite being stated based upon your misunderstanding, all exempt that everything those two nations do is for, in their opinion, the betterment of the world or mostly their own state. While Iran and Syria may not have tried to influence the entire globe in the past (though it seems they’re getting there with North Korean and Venezuelan officials visiting Iran) the governments corrupt their own people, keep them in poverty and uneducated while they, the governments reap all the profits from the natural resources within the country.

I wasn’t comparing
America with
Syria or with
Iran because there isn’t anything to compare.
America changed the face of the world with democracy, did it again by defeating
Japan and
Germany in WWII. Again, the next decade with the invention of the microchip. A final time with the invention of the personal computer…Syria and Iran are insigificant run of the muck nations which many would make the argument are plagues on the world, and yes I know many would make that argument about America but they exempt what positive things america does for the world.

I hope I was not accused of connect
Iraq with September 11, 2001 because that’s not only greatly off base, I did not mention
Iraq one time in any of my posts about terrorism… but I have confidence in the world media as well as world Intelligence, and all signs point to Iraq was just talking to Al Qaeda, and not at that time, yet, funding them or arming them.

Pride is a detrimental quality to possess. Supporting Saddam in the 80’s is not a valid reason to not go to war with his nation, if it’s thought necessary by the smartest and world leading nation . Bin Laden didn’t need external funding, whether it was there or otherwise, his father was rich. “[Saddam] gased his own people” WHERE DID HE GET THOSE WEAPONS FROM??” — How is it that the act of killing his own oppressed citizens is exempted because of where he purchased the weapons?
America aided and profited off these parties, they did not make them become monsters; Saddam and Bin Laden acted on free will, like the rest of your God’s Muslims who become violent, and the ones that are peaceful. “from what i understand, because he is directly quoting me, this last phrase would logically refer to me. so basically his line of reasoning is that i am accusing some opponent of carrying out the 9/11 attacks when in fact i myself am guilty of doing the same thing.in other words, i am a terrorist and have carried out terrorist attacks. what could be the cause of this completely and totally unfounded accusation, could it be the fact that he “condescends all religious people”, me being one of them? or what did i do to deserve this? this guy can’t even pull up fake shreds of evidence against me, let alone any real substantial evidence, to accuse me of something of this magnitude. i wont say any more about this, its obvious where the flaw is.” Instead of saying, “I did not understand because the writer is not efficient” the self-proclaimed terrorist jumps to a stupid conclusion of my saying he or she is a terrorist or something. I was not calling the self-proclaimed terrorist a terrorist, but simply calling him or her stupid and gullible, due to the self-proclaimed terrorist’s false beliefs in conspiracy, among believing the Jewish people are violent or want violence. My claim is validated by his/her belief that a government forces hundreds of media sources to lie: “not to mention the forced lies and cover-ups of their barbaric activities in front of almost all world media…”

 Oh, and just a note of infomation we are just bipedal animals, mammals but still animals.

What It Means To Be a Hard Strictened Communist

According to an interview aired on PBS, transcript on PBS.org, “Russia, over the last couple of days, its envoy, Vitaliy Churkin, has expressed some concern about adopting a resolution that doesn’t have the support of both parties.” It sounds like now that Lebanon is in and Israel is the odd man out Russia has lost all concern about adopting a resolution which might not have the support of both parties. Contradictions and lies are just some of the benefits you get away with as a politician.      This goes off of the title, but what in the world happened to America wanting a resolution that earns a sustainable peace? What in the world happened to Israel being our second biggest ally, which we wouldn’t pass a resolution that they disliked? But the biggest question, where in the world did the practice of the winner gets to pick the terms on which it allowsthe defeated to surrender? How moronic is it to say, “Well Israel is the one we have to get to stop fighting, really. They are the ones that have killed over 1,000 people, when Hezbollah has killed between 100 and 200. So, Israel is the one we, the UN, must get to stop fighting, if only one, and the best way to do that is to make Lebanon happy.” What would have been so bad about getting together a robust multinational force on ships and get Israel to slowly pull back and replaced by that force, without considering Lebanon or Hezbollah’s concerns? Other countries’ men would be dying instead of Israeli men? Yes, that’s what’s this is about. France, Russia, and their allies (the Arabs) want a force that will go in there and not be attacked, even if that means allowing them to re-post on the border “and just kill more Jews”    

Lebanon gets all seven points?! I guess if the U.N. did not do that thousands more will die because Lebanon is the party that needs to be stopped, yes it is Lebanon. 

The making of makers

Being an American, and perhaps living in the South, I’ve really only seen Christianity upfront. But it’s odd, to me, that I am around religious ‘peers’ that are outside Christianity and I know I just tend to respect other ethnic groups than my own, white European ancestry, and that has little to do with religion, but I still see a large contradiction. I very much condescend religious people because to me the reason why people flock to religion is hope, but also it’s a reason to sustain morals, “God tells  you this is the way.”  –Punishment. Both of these elements are quite low in my eyes. But that is Christians, who to me are there for the hope, the hope of an after-life (of purpose), element more than being pious. I don’t know any pious Christians, actually. But other religions seem to have its followers following more strictly than Christianity, so I guess I could respect them more for that reason, but it is still a search for purpose, meaning to their life, which is very revolting. That is that on Religion.

Remapping current events I’ve noticed that these diplomats from Syria and Iran try to say Israel and America is guilty of doing what they themselves are guilty of, which I have to commend is a pretty damn good strategy. I mean what would one know more about (the “why’s ” and “how’s”) than what oneself is doing? Anyhow I do not remember specifics, but I’m sure I could just watch  an Hezbollah video or read an Iranian interview transcript to get any requested evidence. The reason I bring this up is a blog I read a few minutes ago, which I commented on, that said this as his sixth listed prediction:

“Things also seem to suggest that there will be a planned/staged terror attack before November (just like 9/11 was a staged government-sponsored terror attack, and if you think it was those 19 hijackers plus bin Laden – who’s dead by the way – who were solely responsible for that attack, i must say you’re really stupid and gullible).”
–Now I can’t make the assumption that this person’s referring to the American government, but I don’t know any other that would be blamed so my reason for bringing this up is it falls right into this cateogory of accusing an oppoent of something you are or are doing. First off, to use the word staged is to say the attack was fake, that the 3000+ people who were supposed to have lost their lives are alive and well, which would be stupid and is not very commonly believed. But of course this person simply used the wrong term, and meant that the government was behind it. I’ve heard the reasons why this is thought, building fell too fast, Pentagon hole was too small… 19 hijackers and a few masterminds  didn’t well… something about that, who knows, all but this last thing has been countered and I’m not one to say that the reasons why it’s believed are wrong, but I am one to say that the motives are just not there. and the ones that are there are simply not worth the cost of being caught or even for that matter in hindsight what America, the government, has gained is just not that much, and then there’s the motives of why the government would want these things so extremely bad that they would murder 3500 some odd people and put the blame on confessing terrorists.  Point being this stupid gullible person tries to thrown his or her quality on his or her opposition. But beyond that this person seems to be religious (knows a lot about one, which prays to Allah fairly well, at worst) and believing in any religion shows not stupidity but does entirely show gullibility, I just thought that that was rather amusing 

annie gabel

I just watched a three party discussion on Foxnews that included Ann Coulter and something she said caught my interest, don’t get me wrong that lady says many interesting things, but this coincides with something always on my mind. She said, “The modern world is now surrounded by violent savages” something to that affect, and she is right, somewhat. The world is becoming more and more infested with militants who only want to kill, but I’m rather uncertain about the level of the problem they cause. I understand that if left unchecked these people would try to reign over peaceful people by either oppressing them to some sort of slavery or simply murder them, but we, the modern world, is fighting back, and I see what people like Mrs. Coulter are saying as trying to emphasize the need for more needing to be done. I just can’t make up my mind about more. That is, I don’t know how pressing this all really is. 

    On a different note there is an expression passing through liberals’ that I must question. One common argument against Israel’s reaction as well as the Iraqi war is “We are not winning because by what their doing and what we’re doing in Iraq is creating more terrorism than defeating” Now of course this is true, but it exempts something. To make my point I use fantasy. In many stories there is a beast, usually a dragon or serpent, that when the head is sliced off two replace the one, and when those two are taken off, four replace those. This is the same principle that Liberals use against war. So we know if we cut off the head of the dragon two will grow back, but what if we simply left the one head alone initially? Would one head, unchecked cause more damage than two fought? 
Realistically speaking, sure fighting terrorism creates more than is getting defeated, but more would be recruited even unchecked. So is defeating some and getting a backlash better than leaving it be and letting it grow as it will unaided?

fighting for history

In 1947 the United Nations accepted what is called the Partition Plan for Palestine, which would have mapped out the Israeli region of the middle east. The Jewish people accepted it, but the Arabs did not. The land would have looked like this:

You can see that the Aabs would have gotten a bigger Gaza than they received 57 years later and also a much larger West Bank than the arabs have now. But the thing that sticks out in my mind is that the Arabs would have had Jerusalem surrounded, which means it would have been entirely Arab being ruled by the U.N, and that would have probably only been for a time. They denied this and now, throughout the 1990’s the Arabs have fought Israel for less than they could have had in the beginning. Hezbollah was established to get Israel out of Lebanon, really by destroying Israel but I’ll leave that be, because Israel left Lebanon a few years ago and now they are back in Lebanon and Hezbollah has returned to ”fighting until Israel is out of Lebanon.”  These people are moving backward, but do not get me wrong, I’m glad.

the likes and dislikes of a madman in the world of the insane

Let me just start by saying if there is anything about human behavior that I despise it is the art of justifying something because someone else is doing it. I entirely agree with this recent Hezbollah Israeli battle, but I’ve seen a few people say something like, “British troops are fighting Islamic terrorists in
Iraq and
Afghanistan, why the hell should we object when
Israel does the same in
Lebanon?”  
That was a British person, but the art of that justification is in the
U.S. and I assume as global as warm temperature. Yesterday a lady on The O’Reilly Factor was asked about talking to Hezbollah after they’ve broken so many international laws by even existing, and she responded by saying something along the lines of, “if you want to talk about breaking international laws, Israel has…”she was not able to really get out what she was trying to say, but the point is that pointing the finger like that doesn’t help anyone. How does it make it right to kill, steal, rape, or lie simply because someone else is doing the same thing? Is it better, in my opinion, to admit all problems on all sides, but not every one can be simultaneously fixed.