FORWARD – moving backward in history

A few days ago, I just commented on Real Non-Violence Doesn't Look Like This – Forward Thinking – Forward.com

The article, March 18, 2013, 8:52am Real Non-Violence Doesn't Look Like This By Jane Eisner

Carpet Bomb the Palestinians who promote throwing rocks & if the Arab OPEC nations complain and when they cease to exist, take over their oil fields -- the Forward editors are so repulsed by the idea that they shut me out.  Reality -- Ain't never going to happen.  But that is what the rock throwers recognize.  If it were accepted as a possibility, they would think twice about picking up even the smallest pebble.  Reality -- toss a rock and any response appears excessive.  So the bad publicity goes against the defender ... the one who wishes not to have their head cracked open.

Another reality:  The rock throwing will continue, as will the suicide bombers.  Why?  Because Israel and the Western Nations are powerless against them – and they know it.

We are powerless because they can spin any response to be an excessive response.

However, I you broadcast that your only planned response is, by definition, excessive, any response that is not the planned one becomes a sign of moderation and is beyond the scope of their media spin-doctors.

If the discussion involves a primary response that focuses on carpet bombing, then rubber bullets, or real bullets are moderate responses.  They can,. of course, be denounced – but the answer remains that they were a sign of restraint applied to those who would exterminate the aggressors … who are the ones with the rocks, and the ones sending in suicide bombers.

As a child I learned when dealing with bullies … smash them squarely in the nose with everything you have … and keep smashing until they bleed.  Funny thing about that, you need only do it once, and they leave you – and your friends – alone.

The key is, a bully cannot escalate things to the point where they do bodily harm for which they will be held accountable – the Palestinians cannot launch a military aggression against Israel … they cannot come off as an army, a recognized and defined aggressive structure, one with governmental backing, against which military defensive force is always justified (and it is justified to attack their allies).

But the FORWARD does not understand that – they want the people of Israel to go quietly into the Gas Chambers.  They want another Shoah … they would be happy with another Holocaust … it would allow them to sing their hands and moan …

Think about IRAN and their Atomic Bomb:  When they have one that works, they could use it as a first strike weapon.  But that would make them the aggressor and the world would turn on them.  But, if Israel were to move against them – as it has once before – they could use it … they would invoke the logic that the United States used to end the war with Japan … detonation of the bomb over a small, but violent, nation would save lives.  The bomb prevents a protracted war in which many innocent people would die…. granted, it would destroy Israel … a mile over Jerusalem, or Tel Aviv, a nuclear blast would be devastating and put an end to the government.

Israel would be destroyed.

But the Arabs know that Israel must make the first violent move – and rock throwing, or terrorist suicide bombers, do not constitute violent actions on the part of a nation.

But, again, THE FORWARSD editors are far to stupid to understand reality … they would rather the nation quietly walk into the “Showers”  …

Give it time, you’ll see I’m right. 

Forced Conversion

A December 26th news story mentions that Egyptian Christians have accused Muslims of abducting the women and forcing them to convert.  Now this is something that Christian and Muslims have been engaged in for around fifteen centuries.  If we put aside the abducting of women – which is a direct violation of the Koran and therefore proves the Muslim’s are just criminals born to the Islamic religion - What’s the big deal?

Forced conversion is a bit of a joke.  You cannot force conversion – from a religious viewpoint it is irrational and therefore makes it clear that those engaged in the practice are themselves irrational.

Consider this: if two individuals, who wish to reach a common destination, are, by chance, walking down a road and come to a fork in that road … one looks to the left, one to the right, and both BELIEVE they are looking down the proper/correct fork … what is their proper action?

Should they argue over which road leads to the desired destination?  Should one force the other to take and travel THEIR fork?  Or should they each journey as they will with the one who was right achieving their goal of arriving to the destination?  What if the general destination is the same, but different specific locations are sought?  (Two Egyptians heading to the Americas – one to North, the other to South. Or to the United States and one to Maine the other Florida – same government, different state jurisdictions.)

What if both roads go to that destination – and neither has made the wrong choice?  What if neither road gets them there and both their beliefs were wrong?  But to keep it simple, let us assume one is right and the other wrong.  Will the one who is forced be grateful that they have been brought kicking and screaming to the destination?  And what if they have been brought, kicking and screaming, down the wrong road – what response are they entitled to, what punishment can they bestow upon their abductor? 

Now, what if that destination only admits those who came willingly, and what if it also bars admission to those who force others to come there?

In terms of theology – is it valid to bring someone where they do not wish to be?  If so, could not Satan grab souls off the street in the same way the Muslims grab Christian women?  Or the same way Mormons retroactively seal deceased ancestors into a religion which, during the ancestor’s life, the ancestor did not know, nor would have had any interest in knowing?

It is interesting that Al-Qaida in Iraq turned the desire of the women to revert to their faith into a cause celebre when it cited the women as the reason behind a Baghdad church siege.  NOTE that Al-Qaida murderers – those who violate the Koran by killing innocents – are championing the validity of forced conversion.  Those who, by their nature and base doctrine, violate every basic tenet of every known religion, are the ones who are at the forefront in the support of forced conversion.  Just goes to show what the true purpose and value of the underlying religion is … pure evil and mutually assured spiritual destruction.

Real Terrorist Treats

_____________________________________________________
Date Line June 5, 2007

Russia and United States discuss Iran and Iranian nuclear power. Is there a threat? Could Iran get a nuclear bomb and use it?

DUH! That is a distraction from reality. The answer becomes cute; there is no real threat from nuclear bombs unless a nation wishes to flag itself from nuclear destruction.

OK. We are faced with suicide bombers; individuals who care so little for their own lives, and the lives of others, that they will die at their own hands.

What is a suicide bomber? At their highest psychological state, and within an appropriate social context, they are soldiers willing to attack gun emplacements straight on. They are “heros” of the kind we seek our children to be; if we are stupid enough to want to have children so they can die.

And therein lies the problem. There are parents who will sent their children off to war. There are parents who care so little for their own seed that they will cheer its destruction. And there are people so stupid that they do not get it. Instead they yell, “support the troops.”

“Troops” are children, yours and theirs, who are sent out to die in a cause which will enrich those who stay behind, or avoid death. There is no meaning in death for those who are not victorious.

The victor is the one who enjoys the spoils; and, not always, is the one who won the battle. Economics is funny that way. The United States “won” WWII; our factories were in place and safe, the Japanese and Germans lost; they were forced to build all new factories.

Within a generation, America was faced with the need to replace all its antiquated factories and the Germans and Japanese were producing products which dominated world markets; The losers had modern, economical, production systems, and the winners were antiquated.

Who will win?

In the current battle, as I have mention and alluded to, before, those who own the Middle Eastern oil that is NOT in production due to this conflict, are the winners.

That oil will be pumped. Eventually production will resume and it will be when our domestic supplies have been depleted. Only when our domestic supplies are depleted will it be worthwhile for al-Qaeda types to focus on their own domestic conquest.

We will win by paying twice for the oil. First we will pay to delay its recovery, and second we will pay the premium which accrues to a scarce, but necessary, commodity. Iraq will win; those who rule Iraq will win; and we will be their servants.

Who are these suicide bombers? They are the same criminals who rob banks and risk death; except that they go out knowing they will die.

Who are these suicide bombers? Are they not people who have no purpose, no love, no justification, no true intellect? They might be educated; but they lack the intelligence needed to survive; they lack the spirit needed to endure life; they are drug addicts lost in some drug haze of “spiritual” stupidity.

Terrorists are Creationists. The two are the same. Creationists argue that they serve a deity who is a liar. They argue that, while everything argues for a billion year old world, the world is six thousand years old.

Creationists argue that nuclear science is wrong. That half lives which produce stable metal from radioactive are false; that the stable and radioactive were produced together as they are. Creationists support nuclear power plants.

Nuclear power? Thirty years of use, a thousand years of radioactive danger from the waste. Calculate the economics on the thirty years; ignore the thousand years. Why would Iran, or any hostile force, want nuclear power plants?

Not for bombs. They want the waste.

The waste requires no fancy delivery system; requires no launch which can be tracked back to its source; it requires a small quantity of explosive material, which is always locally available (google “improvised explosive device”), and a cubic inch, less than 10 cubic cm, of waste. BINGO! Dirty bomb; and slow death for thousands.

Note George Bush promotes nuclear power; but never discusses the waste problem. George Bush talks of nuclear bombs; but would never discuss the availability of terrorist tools on our own soil; tools which include all the nuclear waste awaiting “permanent” storage.

For that matter; think about our great leaders, those who would take power in 2009, they all talk bull and ignore real threats. Love it!
_____________________________________________________