02-05-2011
Addressing his country early Monday morning, United States President Barack Obama confirmed that top terrorist and al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden is dead. The US is in possession of his body and bin Laden has been positively identified through DNA analysis. Now this a funny one, they do not have the DNA of Osama, they have the DNA from one of his sons, but if they using that it will only show that there is a slight possibility that he could be Osama, it does not proof he is Osama. Next to that what is puzzling is that already three days ago the rumour went in Afghanistan that Osama was death.
However they, the Americans say that it did happen on the first of May. The next part is that they said they have transported the body to Kabul. Then we missing 5 hours, and then we hear that is flown to the sea to be buried. The missing 5 hours in our opinion are easy to explain, they had indeed a body, that body was transformed into the features of Osama, then Photo's were taken a film was made, this will be then connected to the complete burned out house in which supposedly Osama was staying.
That way they created a whole story that easy will be swallowed by the Americans and the heads of state who have to obey the USA. The western countries people are not that easy brainwashed and still can think for themselves.
That part is also a weird part, the Spa home was almost next to an Army Barrack. Would a man wanted worldwide go living in a Spa resort well known by the top. Staying in full view of the Army and have only three man with him to protect. We think that even the US could have come up with a better story to combat the difficult birth certificate questions and the pressure from Donald Trump. What could have been happening is that after a four years severe illness(lungs) he died. The US received notification and have successful for the time being created the so-called killing of Osama, a killing that never did happen.
Crowds where gathered in front of the White House singing the national anthem as the news was launched by Obama, while the Government controlled news media went all out to launch the most fantastic stories in which they every terrorist attack in the world over the last 15 years attributed to Osama. This included the responsible for the mass terrorist attacks on New York and Washington, DC that resulted in the deaths of nearly 3,000 people at the World Trade Centre, the Pentagon in the capital and in a plane crash in Pennsylvania. This while only a month ago the US government said that there was not a single shred of evidence that linked Osama to those attacks.
We think that is right and that they should look to W Bush and his Jewish connections.
"Justice has been done," President Obama said. "Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation" against bin Laden in a compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. Beginning last August, the president said, the US obtained a possible lead to Osama bin Laden. "Finally, last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action, and authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice," he said, adding that the operation had been carried out together with Pakistan and that he had informed the Pakistani president about the situation. However Pakistan denies that they had any prior knowledge, hence that the attack on Pakistan was done under the cover of the CIA. The Pakistani Government also said that they had no prior knowledge that Osama was staying in Pakistan.
Only after the action was announced by Obama with al the theatricals he always used when he tells a lie, suddenly the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) confirmed bin Laden's death. An ISI source said the world's most sought-after terrorist had been located and killed in a "highly secret action coordinated between Pakistani and US forces." Although during and in the hours just after the burning down of the villa they had denied that such an cooperation did exist. Obvious the USA turned on the screws to force Pakistan to Obey.
The operation to burn the villa down began at 1:30 a.m. on Monday morning when four US helicopters attacked the complex. Bin Laden accordingly to the USA and his people allegedly fought back to defend themselves. We talking here about a severe ill man and a nurse and three others against the occupants of four helicopters in which one helicopter was downed. The excuse as always being due to an emergency landing. Which must have been one of the worst emergency landings ever recorded as the helicopter was burned out completely according to eyewitnesses. The ensuing fire-fight, according to the witnesses, lasted 2.5 hours.
It will have no doubt that in the next couple of days the inhabitants of the villa will be growing hour by hour till they are able to make it look like a very difficult operations where the Army was under constant attacks from gunfire and heavy armoury. Fact remains, one sick man one nurse three friends. After the normal questioning under torture as normal by the Americans probably a new story will come afloat, no doubt the CIA has already their best script writers busy to draw up a new scenario.
Here we have then a situation that four helicopters fully manned strike at a home with 5 people, of which one is ill one is a nurse and three are friends, those managed to keep with there limited possibilities the USA army at a distance for two and a halve hour, in which only one man was killed and the woman and the three man were arrested some of whom had been injured in the fire-fight and were then taken to the military hospital in Abbottabad. While the villa burned down completely. Mind you knowing the US propaganda machine in a couple of days it will be not longer 5 people but 500 people who lost from the poor 27 US soldiers. Give it another couple of weeks and it will be 5000 who were fighting.
What is a lie for an American. They used WMD to attack Iraq, they used the Taliban for there attack on Afghanistan and the complete killing of the population of Bengazhi for their attack on Libya. This while it is the US who does the killings, who start the wars. As Obama said if they attack us we defend ourselves, however if we attack a country they are not allowed to defend them selves. The same words Hitler spoke in 1938,it is of Obama sleeps with Mein Kampf under his pillow. The rumours are that a high ranking Pakistani Commander had given the information to the Americans as where Obama could be found. That would correspond with Obama's action. "On Monday morning, President Obama said that bin Laden had been staying in the city of Abbottabad, around 60 kilometres north of Islamabad. Until his death, the Pakistani government had officially denied that bin Laden and other high-ranking terrorists, including his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, or Afghan Taliban chief Mullah Omar had been residing on Pakistani soil. Their is no proof that they new.
Despite bin Laden's death, US President Obama said the dangers posed by al-Qaida had not disappeared. "For two decades, bin Laden has been al-Qaida's leader and symbol," he said. "The death of bin Laden marks the most significant achievement to date in our nation's effort to defeat al-Qaida. But his death does not mark the end of our effort. We must remain vigilant at home and abroad."He know he was talking rubbish as the command was already four years ago taken over by Zawahiri, as Osama himself was to ill to operate any further actions. As always all the sensation seekers came out of the wood works so said Bill Clinton: "This is a profoundly important moment not just for the families of those who lost their lives on 9/11 and in al-Qaida's other attacks but for people all over the world who want to build a common future of peace, freedom and cooperation for our children. I congratulate the president, the National Security team and the members of our armed forces on bringing Osama bin Laden to justice after more than a decade of murderous al-Qaida attacks." Although he knew that Osama could not be linked to the 9/11 attacks, then again as we have seen so many times he could not know he was to busy with other things, knee pads for example.
George W. Bush, who launched the war on terror against the Taliban and bin Laden in Afghanistan in 2001, hooked in also at the chance to be in the news again and to give his version in which he almost managed to claim that it was his work. Forgetting that in his time Osama already had died twice and returned again. Bush said Obama had telephoned to tell him that US forces had killed bin Laden. "This momentous achievement marks a victory for America, for people who seek peace around the world, and for all those who lost loved ones on Sept. 11, 2001," Bush said. "The fight against terror goes on, but tonight American has sent an unmistakable message: No matter how long it takes, justice will be done." And that we will hope after all America hold the record for mass murder and mass genocide, more then 155 Million in 250 years an absolute record and they still goes on killing every day innocent civilians. America is born out of violence and we may expect that they will be judged as such one day.
The Americans call themselves Christians, however that is only for the Media. In reality they breaking every law given by Christ almost every minute of the day. They hope that Christ will return to judge, so do we as the Americans will be most certainly be judged to go to HELL, and so they should to much blood is sticking to their fingers, to be exempt from that judgment. As Christ said all what you do to the innocent is the same as of it is done to me. And for the Americans killing is a sport, maiming is a sport and killing Muslims the best sport of all. In this we hope that Christ will return soon to judge the murdering people of America and sent them where they belong!
====================================================================
04-05-2011
Right or Wrong
What is right and what is wrong and who decide what is right or wrong and can right transformed into wrong and a wrong transformed into a right.This is a question that does not need an explanation in the form of religion or faith. Wrong as we all know is wrong and right is we all know right,still this is a question what is asked since the beginning of time and is a fundamental one. Since the time Human kind started to walk the Earth that question is the center of the Human existence. Many times wrong was made right and right was made wrong. It still is today the same question. Is the UK right to attack Libya? Is the US right to kill someone they do not like without a trail or proof un-armed in a strange country? Is it right or wrong that Israel stops Palestinians to have their own state?
However what ever it is, it is still if wrong is wrong and right is right do we really know that right is right and wrong is wrong could it not be that wrong is right and right is wrong. Can right be made wrong or wrong be made right or maybe we see it as right but turns out to be wrong or we see it wrong and it turns to be right. Maybe it is so that right is indeed right but can be seen wrong in which case we see wrong as wrong which could be right although the possibility can be that it is wrong. What is right in the opinion of the one is a wrong in the opinion of the other and what can be right one day can be wrong the next or is wrong can be right the next day.
Therefore, what is the marker what decide the wrong versa right and what makes an action right or wrong. We have seen that the US uses right to create wrong and then say it is right because they are right but the question can arise and does arise are they? In addition, what do we mean if we saying someone are doing wrong or right or righting a wrong what was in effect right but for the purpose of greed made wrong.Do we mean it is right but we see it wrong or is it wrong and we presume that it is right while in reality it could be wrong? However if it is wrong in reality do we have to question the meaning of right or can we presume that what we see as wrong is indeed wrong. This opens up the question of seeing it right that it is wrong or do we presume it could be wrong while it could be right in which case what is wrong and what is right.As an example was it right for the US to create an incident in pig bay to create a war, while in reality the incident never did happen, was that wrong or was it a wrong to be right for the purpose to be right. Was the excuse of WMD in Iraq a right decisions to attack a country and bring it to poverty just because other countries such as the USA and the UK said it was right, although proven to be wrong, and used to be right.
This is a problem over which human kind have spent many grey hairs. They have talked argued and written for so long human kind is walking the Earth. We do label murder, slavery, wars, torture and robberies as wrong, however we label the same right if it is done for the right reasons although the actions are wrong. Human trafficking is wrong, it is something we all can agree on. However it is seen as a right if it is done by friends who support us,although the deed is wrong, look at Qatar they are the center of human trafficking but they are friends of the US and the UK and therefore what they do is seen as right. The question however arises is this correct to label them right or wrong? There are examples in which others show to that they see this in a different perspective. They argue that the murder of a dictator can be wrong although it is right for the survivors of his regime. Slavery is wrong but is the result of the slavery not beneficial for the for the survivors and generation following.
Wars are wrong but it has not stopped countless army\u2019s to start one always claiming that they had the right on there side, Look at the USA and the UK two countries that always find a reason to attack yet another country and see it as right and their right to do so but in effect it is wrong even if they see it as right. However it is always so that history always grant the winner always the right, even if it is completely and obvious wrong, the bully is always right. However, is this correct could it not have been that the start of that war was wrong? Maybe done for the wrong reasons which are seen as right if successful but as wrong when lost. And if the looser is accused as the wrong doer does this means he was wrong or was he right but lost in which case the attacker was wrong to do so but because his win, was right.
Torture we all say is wrong at all times however it does not stop people from torture others again under the claim that they have the right on their side take for example Iraq and Afghanistan. It is obvious that they are wrong but again seen as right because they won. However the same we see in Bahrain where the ruling family has an reputation for torturing as a form of pleasure on the prisoners. That is wrong, but because he is a friend of the USA and the UK it is seen as right. Is it right or is it wrong but do we grant the right because they were the strongest and therefore have the right to torture although wrong accepted as right. Maybe we are wrong and the right should always be on the winning side although they acting wrong. Does this means we accept that it is right although experienced wrong while being told it is right. Torture would save lives as they claim and saving lives cannot be wrong so the wrong is right or is it.
Robbery is wrong or so we are told but if done by ones in power then it is seen as right. See for example the taxing system in some Countries, special in the UK where taxing is a way to keep the people poor and the rulers rich. Therefore, if it benefit the ones in power then it is also right this is off course a duty-based clarification. They can declare a wrong as being right, while at other times they can declare the right wrong. Objections to this are rejected as they see right or wrong as right or wrong whatever the outcome.They have the power therefore they can do what they want, when they want it and to whom they want to do it. That is a wrong, but again by the rulers it is seen as a right, a right of the ruler. This deserves a more clearly defined explanation but as wrong and right are not clearly defined such an explanation is not possible the position therefore that robbery is wrong is wrong.
Religious groups see it simple. Wrong is against the will of God and Right means simple that this is what the God wants. Without the religion, they are lost in the arguments of right and wrong. They follow simple the lead their religion has pointed out for them their duty is clear Wrong is against the Will of God and Right is Gods Will. For them following commands is a form of morality and even the killing of a dictator is seen as right, although it is wrong. The excuse is that it will have saved ten of thousands of people and a war is justified as a Right being the Will of God. However to have a God they need to create one first. Old history and folk tales are used to create an God's history, which is then slowly developed into a real version of an real existing God. Right or wrong is simple not coming into it.
Others believe Wrong and Right is decided by Law and rules, but this means the law makers can use Wrongs to make it Right if it suits their purpose. It also gives them the Right in a way to make them look Wrong again to suit their purpose. We can stand our ground and point out that for a right to be wrong there has to be a reason which makes it right to see right as a wrong. In reality, we know what right and wrong is but both right and wrong are properties of the ones in power. They are the ones who create the basics for the right and the wrong while they are in power.
We can argue against it we can object and point out that what right is cannot be wrong, but although we are right, the power over rules and makes the rules of what is right or wrong.
It can mean an opposite opinion but although right is in principle wrong as the power will always over rule what is a right and made wrong if it suits the power. We can wonder over the reasons we can object the conclusion of the powers decision but right or wrong is right in our eyes will always decided by the ones in power who decide what is right or wrong even if it is blatant obvious that wrong is right and right is wrong.
There are many rights and wrongs and we can wonder if so many right and wrongs do not block the view on what is really right or wrong. Some rights and wrong are well defined. For example, right can be very easy although being right used as a wrong.
It is for example right to have respect for older people and for older disabled people so that they can live out their live in peace. This is also a moral duty therefore right. It can be used as a wrong by ones in power for example as costing too much if the ones in power has to feed the cost for the older and the older disabled. In that case, the ones in power see it as a wrong what is in reality right.A prime example is the village of Jaywick in Essex/UK.It is a small seaside resort blooming strongly till just after the late sixty er years when Flying to an holiday became more affordable and interesting. It was build in the thirty er years as an holiday resort, had the d\u00e9b\u00e2cle of the 153 February storm, after which the local powers decided that they wanted them out. The local power are mostly selfish ignorant little dictators who main interest is to make it their friend so easy as possible and the rest the poor the elderly and the disabled so difficult as possible. The result is that the main place called Clacton is a more or less run down seaside resort with out flowing small resort which are already death but do not realise it it such as Walton and Frinton.
It must be the only place in Europe where the roads are muddy and dangerous to walk or to use a wheelchair, not that it bothers the "I am always right leaders" they see them selves as right, and a such they are the belong to the ultra right Conservatives party, but in reality they are wrong, and as such they not only make the populations life hell but also slowly demolishing the local business, as more and more shops are closing which they claim then is someone else fault, but in reality it is their own fault. They see that as right but they know very well that they are in fact wrong. Using power to suppress the population is in style of the Ultra right, but is in fact wrong and is something that belongs in the NAZI period. However the resembles of it can be still found there. Wrong that is obvious but the little hitlers find that they are right. Such a reaction by the ones in power can lead to the dead of older and older disabled people, as they do not have enough funds to eat to heat themselves and to obtain care if they need it and cannot go outside special in the winter as the roads are to dangerous.
It is seen as wrong by most but as right by the ones in power as it decreased the quantity of older and older disabled people needing funding. Look at a example such as the UK were older people have to come around with amounts of money just enough to keep them barely alive but to short to live from, hence the level of dead of older and older disabled people is higher then elsewhere in the industrialized world. Besides that is it immoral to inflict such an action and is seen as wrong, it is still promoted as right by the ones in power who although lowering still further the older and older disabled people in real terms still see every reason to increase drastically their own income seen as inadequate. They, just as the little hitlers in that seaside resort blame others for this, as that is easier then to admit that they are wrong which they see as right. As a figure quoted, they obtain a weekly amount what is on level as what the older people receive yearly. Nevertheless, they say it is not enough they need more, but at the same time, they say that, the older and the older disabled having more then enough. Moral wrong as wrong against right but as they have the power they see it as right.
It does mean that they have lost the respect for the older and older disabled people seen them as an extra funding cost and therefore they (the older people) are wrong. The question here is that if the ones in power would act morally right they would threat the older and older disabled with respect, which would cost more funding but would be right. It would gain them more popularity but would cost funds therefore it must be wrong as for every day an older or an older disabled person lives it cost money, so the preferred option is to lower the basic income in real terms for the older or older disabled persons and trust they die soon and again funds are saved.
Doing the moral right action would mean the level of older people alive would grow and that they see as wrong so that the ones in power see the older and older disabled as wrong and therefore they should not receive adequate funding which would them make living longer as that would be wrong. On one side they portray the older people as citizen who deserve a peaceful live after a live time of work and they see that as right. However, that would cost funding and that they see as wrong so that they are morally wrong from every angle, but because they are in power, they see it as right. So it will be wrong if it cost funding a morality of prejudice matter but unless there is a morality good reason to see it otherwise, it is also a form of cruelty.
For example, cruelty is Wrong, as it is a form of torture. Why is it seen as Right by people in power to use it to control others? Using it as a Right although wrong and therefore see cruelty as right if used by one group but wrong if used by another group. Here is interlinked Right and Wrong as the same item. We have already established that for ones in power torture is a right and as cruelty is part of torture, they presume that the cruelty is right although being wrong. For killing counts the same criteria, Killing is wrong unless the ones in power allow it, in which case it is right. Cruelty and killing if they can be used as Right while being Wrong does that mean there is also an apology for rape, slavery, robbery and theft, and if cruelty and killing are used as Right is there a right to prevent those or any justification to stop them happening and is there any logical reasoning to let it happen or to prevent them.
Does this mean that the principle of Right and Wrong not exist? Is it subject to the initiative of the moment where it can be decided on that particular moment in time of the action is Right or Wrong while in principle the action taken was Right but the morality of the action is wrong. Man can wonder the morality of this right and wrong it is possible to say right is subject to wrong as wrong is subject to right and right and wrong can be used freely to either side of being right or wrong. However, in most Countries right is what the ones in power have decided what is right even if this is wrong. Wrong is all action taken and not supported by the ones in power even if it is Right.
Wrong can therefore be Right if it suits the ones in power and Right can be Wrong if it suits their purpose. It does mean that Right and Wrong can be switched to suit the wanted result and therewith disregards the principles of Right and Wrong. The problem arise when an action has only two alternatives and both are not wanted, as Right can be turned into Wrong and still be Right and Wrong can be turned into Right and still be wrong. The morality of the question of Right and Wrong is simple, doing Right is done out of a sense of Duty, doing wrong is done with the possibility for personal interest. From whatever side you will then look at right and wrong the personal interest will be the right one even if wrong while out of a sense of duty right is always right even if it is wrong, which turns duty into a personal interest and therefore could be wrong.
It will be put forward and argued against that such a power who has the recognitions of other Governments will not engage in such an action as that would be wrong in principle, but the power will argue that because they are the power they are in principle always Right although evidence points to wrong. In relation with believing in God, they should be good over evil but evil will be good if the power is evil. There for it will be argued that such a power does not exist. This right of power is based on the money and power position they have above the the other Governments and they feel therefore superior above them. The other Governments will therefore obey the power as that will shine on them and will be rewarded. This is very good visible in the situation between the USA and the UK. Where the UK will do anything that the USA orders the UK to do and therefore all what is wrong in reality is right in the powers mind. It does tell a tale about that mind and the failure to understand right and wrong, as they only understand money and power.
===================================================================
06-05-2011
When power corrupt!
Does power corrupt is a question that is denied by the powers who are corruptive and agreed on by people who are not in power. However, Power does corrupt, as by example look at the tiny state of Qatar, there the ruler, a good friend of the President of the USA and the UK PM, rules with a power he stole from his father, when his father was not looking. This man, which rules with an iron but corrupted fist, rules the main centre for human trafficking from south east Asia. He rules with his own laws and his own power does not accept International Juridical laws, and have a ministerial council of family and friends, with no power for the people or by the people. He supplied rebels with money and weapons in return for their oil and minerals. That is corruption created by the want for power, it automatic makes the friends he has also corrupt. Because of that corruption they are able to pull strings to make wrongs look like right although they know they are wrong.
Those corrupted powers feel that they have the superiority to be right and there for they are right, although they morally wrong but the morality is simple switched off from right to wrong. Morality is for all conscious humans it leans entirely on the sense of Duty, in other words if you want to be respected then act to right and avoid wrong.
In the powers case, they want to be respected without having to be right and still can act wrong without loosing respect, which already have knowingly lost although that does not matter as the are right all the time even when it is wrong. They know that they are tolerated out of the fear of their power and therefore will still have the support of the supporting powers and their agencies and hangers on, like the dictator of Qatar. Therefore, they see their actions as right although they know their actions are wrong and morally unacceptable. It place them at the same level as the supporters of cruelty and torture as the result of their actions, they know it is wrong but the incoming funds tell them that they are getting richer and therefore it is right.
The conclusion has to be that corruption is Right although it being Right can be made Wrong. It is Right to suit the purpose of power and that in their eyes the words right and wrong are in principle the same depending on which side of the wrong or right they stand. They have the power they are corrupt although they do not see this that way. Therefore in the above sample people are always wrong although being right and the power is always right although being wrong. It therefore shows that it means that right is wrong and wrong is right depending who has the most power and money as power and money are morally wrong but seen as right. The question therefore of power corrupt is not a question of morality but a question of who ask themselves what need to be right or wrong although wrong can be right and right can be wrong.
But what if corruption can be seen as right and power can be seen as right is right then right or is right still wrong but seen to be right as the corruption does it seen to be right? So corruption can be Right and right can be wrong. Is Wrong then Wrong and can be Right then be extended to another long for asked argument that of Good and Evil. This needs the existence of God. Right could be good and wrong could be evil. This extension if possible could put forwards the meaning that the wrongs committed by the power although seen by them as right can be seen as Evil and therefore wrong. However,from the peoples point of view the point of the power that his right is rights and that therefore the peoples right is wrong can only be explained if it is accepted that the power is corrupt. In that case the people are right and the power is wrong. However the power has the power to declare the peoples right wrong and his right to be the only right.
The above can show us a complicated argument that if the corruption mentioned before is right, it means that the power is indeed evil as opposite to good. Can it be as by right and wrong where by right can be wrong and a wrong can be right, can evil then being good and good being evil. It could mean that the power although being evil is good, but if so does this means that evil is good and does it make all good evil and all evil good does that makes all who are good in principle evil or if evil has power and money means that evil is good?
Let us look at the powers point of view, which is opposite to that of the people's view. Does the power stand in clear contact with the reality of daily life or in the reality of his own vision of power opposite to the peoples view, does the power realise the peoples problems? What we have shown makes it obvious the power does not, as a power who knows the different between right and wrong would not obstruct the wishes of the people.However it is obvious that the power wants his right for no other reason than to obstruct, this follows that the prower is against in principle of the people who he governs. As before, we have shown that the ones with power lean on funds to enhance that power having it to spend on the well being of the population. However that would mean less funds for himself, and that is wrong, and it is obvious for the power that he cannot be in a position of being wrong.
To obstruct harass bully and intimidate the population is not the only option. This is not possible without having others around to check and to report to the power all who does not obey the power. Most powers in this position in which they are wrong but have to look right have so called right hands who are doing the work on the ground for him. That can be special police, special units, special home security, counter security, investigation security, counter intelligence agencies and so on. Those are paid for by the people who are to be kept under control. As such, they are a fruitful ground force to be reckoned with who receive and collect information in which they glorifying themselves in the shine of the powers attention and rewards. They fail to recognise that they are used to make right wrong to please the power and are simple an extension of his tools to convert right in wrong and make wrong into right.
However, can we see this behaviour as moral? We do not think so, as the so much used clich\u00e9 by ones who have power regardless of this is on lower, middle or higher base, kick someone when they are down and you will be always on top. Is obvious by this power it is the first line of instruction to his right hands. they for fill his wishes to the letter and beyond. This always followed by step on those who need help and get rewarded you for the effort. How further they are from the top how more violent they enforce his instructions. They hope to get the attention of the higher up and be rewarded for their effort. However if they acted in good behaviour and would help the people what is their duty, the people would feel free. However that is against the principles of the power. If people would feel free that that would be right but wrong for the power as free means having their own opinions. Having their own opinions would mean that the power could loose, and that would be wrong, so to make it right help will be revoked and the freedom is gone. The wrong will be right again and corruption will be good although in principle it is evil.
As rational humans beings they have certain duties which they should for fill with compassion and morality. Their hypothetical duty tells you what to do, and what not to do, if you want to be seen as a compassion human kind. However, they act the way the power has instructed regardless of this is wrong or evil. The reward is more power not doing so cost them power or a down grading from the power above, and forget the Golden rule never do to others what you don\u2019t like to have done to you and just follow the powers orders.
The question of argument is do they act wrong and evil out of their own desire or do they follow the power from above commands and if so do those two duties conflict. The failure to respect other human\u2019s interest makes them less critical for the next order. Their main objective is to please the power. Where by the power if in conflict will deny any pressure or instruction. They are back to their own desire and in conflict with the power from above. If they had acted morally and respected the other people\u2019s interest it would have been, even if the justification of the powers absurd action had been in their interest. It would show them as acting moral and with compassion, which would have put the powers command of trail, although in the past dismissed as inadequate and irrelevant. They would have shown compassion and sympathy and a sense of duty. Feeling compassion for those would be considered as praiseworthy from the victim\u2019s viewpoint although the property owner or power would strongly disagree.
The moral dilemma is here do we act right and good and show compassion for the people or do we obey our pay master wishes and see the wrong as right and the evil as good and ignore the corruption. The point here is what gives the human in that situation the most satisfaction and happiness as doing good can be seen as bringing happiness the right action in those situations can be calculated by examining the probable reaction on the action taken as what is likely to bring the most happiness for all and what is therefore the right action.
The moral dilemma depends if for example we follow the powers instructions. This would cause a suffering effect for the people. Would we feel deeply distressed by knowing that our actions by following the powers instructions made them suffer and unhappy and make us feel unhappy which has to be set off against the expected pleasures of having the powers approval which could mean more money or promotion. The difficulty in this is the way to measure happiness and happiness of other people, whether or not, it had the right happiness effect on the one in power against the suffering of the victim. Would the morality of our character allows us to inflict those pain and suffering for the pleasure of maybe more money and promotion greater standing. Would we not have a greater happiness if we ignored the one in power\u2019s instruction and showed compassion towards the people. This action taken could have a severe re-action as the one in power for example could take action against us. Do we have the moral courage to stand up against such wrong and evil instructions. We know if they fail to produce the effect the instruction will be denied by the one in power. We will be pointed out as the evil wrong doers.
Corruption is seen as a curse in human kind and in nature but if we see accept it as evil then we also have to accept that there is a God. Good and Evil is always set off against the existence of a God, while right and wrong is to be set off against the law and rules made. Some argue that Evil does not exist as there is no God and evil cannot be defined by rules and lawmakers. Therefore, we talk about Right and Wrong were as by Right can be seen as Good and Evil as Wrong. Historically we live by the rules and laws by Right and Wrong. However, there has to be Evil and Good to be based on a God, look at the concentration camps in the Boer wars and the second WW. It cannot be denied that they were wrong. The evil done cannot be denied. However both were products of lawmakers and therefore seen as right. It was a simple question of who won to establish of it was right or wrong the Germans lost so the Camps were wrong but what if they had won would they still have been declared wrong, therefore is wrong just wrong or is it right defined by law and opinion to wrong.
A better definition would be to declare them places of the highest cruelty run by masters of cruelty encouraged by corruption, as power corrupt. In which case although they were places of cruelty they were also right as they were places created by law and as we have established the lawmakers the rules of right and wrong, see the example of Qatar. However, this right was clearly wrong and therefore the lawmakers must have been wrong but if the lawmakers were wrong then does this means that all lawmakers could be wrong just look at Iraq and Afghanistan and the matter of the killing of Osama Bin Laden. What we have tried to establish here is that corruption can be Right and Wrong can be Wrong and Right or Wrong can only be right, Right can only be Wrong, or Right and Wrong could be the same entity.
It means the situation at that particular moment in time could be changed any moment by the lawmakers of that moment.
Does this means there is no right or wrong other than is decided by lawmakers or the power at that moment. It is the corruption that makes it possible for the power to stay in power and to expand on his power. It seems that there is that morality what most people have been born with that feeling of right and wrong and although the law maker can label something right the feeling will be still there that it is wrong and visa versa. Is it for that reason that many take to the solution that there is a God in which they want to believe as an offset against the ones in power. They believe that this believe can divide right and wrong in good and evil as all what God instruct is Good and all what he does not instruct is Evil.
The so-called easy way out of responsibilities to divide good, evil, right, and wrong, corruption and power. Natural disasters are wrong per definition but there is a argument that disasters could be Evil. Although natural disasters such as a typhoon\u2019s and a Earthquake\u2019s are experienced as a cruel disaster for the victims, They cannot be seen as evil unless the effect is worsened by human incompetence or lack of action to help. Such disasters can only be seen as disasters not as Evil. For evil there has to be an divine interference while natural disasters are only be made worst by human reactions not by divine intervention, nor are they caused by divine intervention but mainly by the constant activities of the Earth.
If on the other side of this argument, the disasters are products of natural Evil. They can only be seen as Evil is there is a believe in the existence of God. If that believe is there how can we seriously believe in such a Being. The existence of all-good, as a all-knowing Being it would be able to prevent those natural disasters occurring. Such a Being, which is also, attributed as all-knowing all-good all-powerful a perfect Being should also be attributed as all-Evil. If that God is all good, then why does he not protect his creation and protect it from the evil of natural disasters. There is an argument made that the existence of Evil is not Good but because there is Evil poverty and disease it leads to great moral goodness. This is an obsolete point as without Evil poverty and disease there would be no use for an increase of moral goodness and would be a superior Being if exist use dead and destruction poverty and disease to increase morality.
We explained before that the argument is that Right and Wrong are made by rule and law\u2019s to cover up any form of corruption. where as by Right can be one day right the next day wrong, in principle we have a Free Will to decide Right and Wrong but only after we are told what is Right and what is Wrong. We can do things today what over centuries is seen as good but same thing now is seen as a wrong. In reality new measure were not made because the old ones were wrong but because the power found that they were wrong as it obstructed new measures taken by him. However, because it created extra source of income for the makers of those laws the right had to be made wrong so that for the wrong reasons a new right could be created which was in principle wrong. Therefore, the law is wrong but made right because it is a law. After all for example being on the Country side and cut some flowers as a momentum was always a pleasure and therefore right but it is now against the law and therefore Wrong.
However, this shows that any law can be made in a right and any right into a wrong, This does not this means that actually the makers of the law acted with alternative motives and therefore is Wrong in principle they could be right for the wrong reasons. They are seeing themselves as Right because they are the law makers. However, they say they are right and therefore as the rule was made to obtain money (fines) and not a increased morality it must be seen as wrong. This leaves the question is it moral to declare something wrong while in principle it is right for the sake of obtaining money which is morally wrong and a form of corruption, but seen as right by the makers of the law curtailing the Free Will.
We have illustrated that right can be wrong and wrong can be right, That corruption is wrong but is used as right, that if there is an believe in a God Evil can be Good and Good can be Evil. When they say therefore that God is all-good does that mean it can be seen and experienced as an all-evil. A God who allows such a evil in human actions and natural disasters cannot be seen as all-good but also as all-evil. It makes a mockery of the right is wrong defence as it presumes that right is only possible if we have the possibility to do wrong. Can it be correct can there be a connection between right and wrong as one does not exist without the other. The connection only stands if it is believed that right cannot be in existence with out the possibility of doing wrong which then leans on the presumption that God exist and therewith we are back to the previous Right and Wrong Good and Evil.
Wrong exist due to rules and laws, and it obvious that if a violent person is killed by another for reasons of morality and without rules and laws to state otherwise such an act is not Wrong. With rules and laws concerning such an act the person would be declared Wrong but is it, the killing of that violent person could have saved others from cruelty and dead so was the killing Wrong?
====================================================================
08-05-2011
Obama the prophet killer.
Since the murder on Osama Bin laden rightly or wrongly the perpetrator suddenly has decided to go on the religion tour. We are all Christians, he said, and it is just there were he goes wrong. The Lords instructions for the Abrahamic religions is rather clear and not open to any alteration by devious mind such as Obama, the President of the United States. We do not know what was the reason for the sudden attempt on the life of the face saver of America. After all without Osama the USA had to created another reason to attack countries who had the goods or the minerals they needed.
As such Osama did them a favour. It was the flame of hate where all the Americans were consumed by. It is therefore not understandable why the killing was done now. It was for over four years well known where he was and that his health was sharp deteriorated.
So why now? Was it because he was set on the back foot by Rockefeller and did he wanted to use the death of Osama to create an new re-election opening. Or was it the fact that he was accused of murdering children in Libya, we don't
know and we can be sure that Obama will not tell us. However what ever reason it was it was done for his own personal benefit. Not for the benefit of the United States, not for the people of the United States, no purely for him self.
And it did work, as the people of the United States reacted to the murder with an enthusiasm as only seen before when Adolf Hitler used the same kind of measures to keep the people in check. We are however afraid that just like the people of Germany who paid an very heavy price, the people of the United States will be paying a similar kind of price. That the death of Osama was purely propaganda, just as the Reichtags fire in Berlin under Hitler. However Obama need someone to blame and have to go on blaming his killing spree over the world on someone, so he has decided to take another member of Osama's team as the lead for the American people to concentrate on.
He is however not sure that this will work out in the long term, therefore he has now decided that leaning on the American form of Christianity. The form that say thank you to the Jewish population for killing Christ, and making the world a very dangerous place to live. The people that cheers by every death of a Muslim for no other reason then that it is a Muslim. It shows the intellectual back yard of America as Muslims are just as the Jews and Christians followers of Abram. Using the same history and the same laws, having the same violence and aggression which dropped the world in endless wars. Wars were the Jews were the always losers but where the Muslim and Christianity many times shared the many victories and defeats.
The word however is not the word of Obama but that of God, it teaches us that God is good Almighty All-powerful, and we have no doubt that this believe find widespread knowledge by people who need a survival kit to come through life. We have no doubt that God will take into his calculation the many instructions to murder given by Obama in his search for Greed instead of Creed.
The more inquisitive want to know some more about this and query to words Good Almighty and All-powerful. We know from the Word that he pretend to be All-Good and All-Powerful but is this correct are we not taken in by something for which there is no concrete proof, nor have we any examples for that All-Good and that All-powerful, what we do have are some serious queries about the Goodness of that Word.
However, using it as an excuse to commit murder via wars for Greed, is not written in the laws given by God.
If we read the Word we find contradiction upon contradiction, Evil upon Evil instigated by that under cover of that Word.
And fulfilled by that word. Do we really have to understand that when Adam had two sons and one was killed by the other, God gave the following instruction to Cain a fugitive and a vagabond shall thou be in the Earth. We beg ignorance but there was Adam and Eve plus Cain as Abel was dead, does God said fugitive and if so, from what, there were only three of them. A vagabond where is that coming from as there were only three people on earth. In addition, were that vagabond coming in from, as they could not know what that was as there was never one before.
This part of the Word reminds us that the Word was given by God but written by mere people.
Therefore, Cain left and went to the land of Nod, and miracle O miracle there he found suddenly a wife, the bible does not explain were that one was coming from there East of Eden as what ever other were born out of Adam and Eve they could not have been already in the East of Eden. The Bible does not give any indication of any other children by Adam and Eve, so here we have a real question mark.
Not only he found himself a non-existing wife but he also builds a city, for what a handful of people.
We do not doubt the Word of God, but we do doubt the written translation of that Word, and so does Obama who is using the inconsistency for his own benefit
Let us not forget we taken the Bible as the Word as being instructed by the Christian doctrine.
So let us go back to the original set-up. Here we have Adam and Eve with there sons Cain and Abel.
Cain slew Abel after this Adam had a son named Seth after that he had sons and daughters.
We suddenly notice that God has more sons see Genesis 6:2-4 and Giants, there must be things he did not tell us, not only that the sons of God took the daughters of man whom bare children to them. In addition, if we read the book of Enoch we see that not only God had more then one son, but behold! His cometh with ten thousands of His holy ones.
Heaven there must be a place, to house all those sons who took the daughters of man and were Giants or as Enoch said Angels or what ever is nearest and then there ware the ten thousand holy ones. Heaven must be quickly becoming a rather crowded place. It is in the book of Enoch that the translation is not sons of God. However, of angels who lusted after the daughters of man.
The book of Enoch also explains the Giants being children of the daughters of man taken by the sons of God or angels whatever comes first. And the Giants were three thousand ells in height.
We are now on a point where we can be sure that the translators of the Word must have added their own version to it ,probably to make it more interesting. What still is not clear that if the giants were evil, and they did not obey the Lords commands. Why did he not kill them alone why destroy all life and plants, and maybe the humans were at fault but what about the plants and the animals, why kill them all rather sadistic for an All-Good God.
That is of course if that version of the Word did happen and that we do not here talking about the many floods and high water in spring from rivers or Tsunami's from sea. And all had not be needed if the Almighty not had planted the forbidden tree, the way of that puzzles many, the best we can think of that he did not found what he created that good and did build in a way out.
Now for the real world, of course the Bible is the Word but does it need to be so taken literary, after all it took thousands of years before even the smallest of characters were invented and the written down stories are only in time consume reasoned. The rest was transferred from generation to generation. We all know what storytellers can do. They make the story larger or smaller, more exiting or less leave evil out or brought more in just as what the public wanted. Then sifting through the stories which only can be done in the light of those stories and the earliest known written stories such as the epic of Gilgamesh and the Enuma Elish the Dead Sea scrolls and the Hebrew stories.
All those stories adding up to one thing, there is a God who Created Heaven and Earth although in the writers opinion not in the time limited of Genesis but over an much longer period, There was and that is without any doubts Jesus Christ, the learning\u2019s from him and his followers are well known.
So if we simple come back with two feet on Earth. Then leave out the Hebrew History, the Semitic\u2019s, and the Sumerian\u2019s the Amorites stories. And we stick with Christianity while using the Hebrew bible as a back up as how it all started. Then we can bring back the Christianity to peoples life, as the many stories what make up the old Testament create to many doubt as with the more knowledgeable human beings of our time calculating questions will be asked and the answers are not fort coming other then silly explanation as were every slightly intelligent person will stick through within seconds.
By doing so yet another soul is lost because if they have doubt about the Old Testament then doubt creeps also in for the New Testament and if that does happen there interest is lost.
We have unfortunately to many so called Christians who are stuck in a dogma to believe all what is in the Book must be correct because it is in the Book. They use it just as Obama for their own benefit showing with that simple fact that they not really believe that there is a God. They should know that if they believe there is a God , God would remember the misuse of his name by Obama, and we may doubt of God will say thank you Obama for doing that. Would God really reward Obama for breaking all the Christian laws given by Him. You shall not kill, not steal, not taken your neighbours goods,not lie and making false promises. God laws, and each of them is already broken many times by Obama but also by G W Bush many of times. And G W Bush even said that he heard the voice of God.
We hope that who ever read this will feel as we feel, There is a God and Jesus Christ and we cannot pass by on the incredibility of the Creation which we see daily, but we have to accept that next to the incredibility of the Creation there are others who prefer Evil and do Evil, and only by strengthening our lines we can defeat them. And have to accept that many so called Christians are Christians because they can use that Christianity for there own benefit as an excuse for killing and stealing. God will judge them at a later time, but as they are no Christians they do not believe this and therefore will go on like Obama with stealing and murder to place themselves on a pedestal for all to see. We see him as what he is, EVIL!
================================================================
12-05-2011
Every religion has his own statements regarding the peace in the world, they see it all happening at a different way.
The Buddhism teaches us that whether we have global peace or war is up to us to make the different s. They see the situation not as hopeless and out of control. From the Buddhist point of view, if we don't do anything, who else will?
Peace or war is not our decision. The decisions are made by a small group of mental unstable persons who do not have any form of conviction or believe, although they sometimes present themselves as fighters for peace. However that is to please people to get support they need.
The fundamental goal of Buddhism is peace, peace in heaven and peace on earth. The Buddha taught that the first step on the path to peace is understanding war. When we understand what causes war we know what causes peace, then we know where to direct our efforts. In other words, we can take our actions in our quest for peace. But if we do not first address the fundamental issues of war, then all other actions to find peace will come to nothing.
Buddha taught us that a peaceful mind lead to a peaceful speech and peaceful actions.
If the minds of living beings are at peace, the world will be at peace. But who has a mind at peace? The main stream of the population live in the middle of a daily struggle to survive with only small and precious moments for brief and treasured moments. Even the holy persons whose minds should be at peace are in reality in turmoil, hence their constant initiatives for calling of peace. If we would wait for certain groups in the world to become sages, then there is no chance of a peace in the world for us.
Obvious against the learning\u00e2\u0080\u0099s of Buddha, if our minds are not completely peaceful then there is no possibility to reduce the levels of war in the world. Even the Buddhist are not free of un-peaceful thinking as behind many violence, uprising and war stand a Buddhist group in support. Even during Buddha\u00e2\u0080\u0099s life time, he was indirect involved in the strategies of uprising and war.
Nichiren an 11th century Buddhist of high intellect, but issued with an stubborn un-peaceful feeling against other Buddhist groups and the Government, was the center of controversy that landed him time after time in conflict with other Buddhist groups and the Government. I nearly cost him his life but was saved by his sadly untimely death.
Buddha saw life and death as a born and reborn of life. Just as, animals can, in certain circumstances, be reborn as human beings. Unfortunately if that is correct then it could explain the animal aggression that some war makers have, look at the USA and Israel, the two most aggressive countries in the present world.
The causes of war are always the same although many different excuses or reasons are given, excuses and reasons too numerous even to list, the real cause is always greed and power. Either to take what the other has or the fear that the other one will be growing stronger and could have more power. Whatever excuse whatever reason given the real cause is always Greed and Power?
War is not something abstract. War is against one group or another. The reasons for war are always the same. We have now started to feed data into a computer and analyze of and when we can start a war and what will be the result at such a war can be started and directed according to logical programming into a computer. It is individuals who decide to wage war. Even if the war is global, its beginning can be traced back to the decisions of individuals. All wars are always the result of a small group of mental unstable people acting out of a graving for Power and Greed.
The doctrine of karma teaches that force and violence, even to the level of killing, never solves anything. The same doctrine also makes it clear that Karma does not object to force and violence. It is therefore that Buddhist says they do not fight, however a war is not alone about fighting. It is also persuasion convincing and support it is here were the Buddhist is at its strongest path. Killing creates fear and anger, which creates more killing, more fear, and more anger, in a continues cycle.
Buddha\u00e2\u0080\u0099s point is that if you kill your enemy in this life, he is reborn, seeks revenge, and kills you in the next life. However, there is a floor in that way of thinking; nobody knows who is born where and when. Therefore the enemy you killed does not know you or even knows of you are still existing or still have to be reborn and as what. If the people of one nation invade and kill or subjugate the people of another nation, sooner or later the time will come for the people of the conquered nation to wreak their revenge upon the conquerors. That is a fact and history shows us this over and over again. Never ever has there been a war that brought a positive end to a problem.
Therefore, although the principle of peace should be foremost on every bodies mind and their thought and action and reaction should be directed towards peace. It is not possible as long as there are small groups in charge of countries despite their limited mental capacities who are desperate for Power and Greed. Those people do not care of their own people die, their own people starving or losing all what they have. They want one thing Power and Greed, Greed and Power.
No Buddha in the world can alter this, No teachings of Buddha can alter this they know it but they still are activating the youngsters to believe that a universal peace would be possible. Reality by that Buddhist leader will not prevent them from collecting more youngsters to their vault. Those Buddhist leaders are also searching for more power, power for themselves and for their group. Therewith they violate the fist teaching of Buddha, PEACE. If those youngsters are in then they are in, and the change that they will escape is remote, as more and more yarns are spin around them until they cannot see reality anymore.
If at a certain point in time reality set in, then this are the ones who will be on the forefront of the war for Power and Greed. The principle, this as an example, is used by the Soka Gakkai International, an organization for global power and the Greed for more power. They using a slogan the: Nam-myoho-renge-kyo as a possible quick rich scheme. Or as they say it if you chant than the Buddha state emerges from within.... and contribute to a creative and peaceful society.
It does sound fantastic for the ones who sitting on a dead track, in a life without progress or hope, however it does not exist in reality. The reality is completely different; they are still the ones on a dead track without progress or hope. However they have each other in a group, they lean at each other and life feels better for some of them. For others, they leave family and friends as soon as they are in the SGI vault, Daughters leave parents, sons suddenly leave home, and grandchildren do not visit their grandparents anymore. They steal money from their parents under the most fantastic excuses, as soon as they have it they simple disappear and the money never is returned.
This is the experienced reality of SGI, destroyed family life, families at war, not much peace here. And the president of the SGI is still telling the world he wants peace, while at the same time he is creating war.
The emotions of those family wars created by the Buddhist SGI translate into more and more hate and family feuds; this is the same with wars as the weapons of killing become more and more sophisticated the level of killings will go up. For example, the President of the US loses his temper, and as a result hundreds of thousands will lose their lives their livelihood. His remarks\u00e2\u0080\u0099 concerning Iran speaks for them, and then again his is on good terms with the Dalai Lama. Would he be able to tell how many unnecessary lives will be lost, how many lives will lost as the result of the employment of our modern weaponry.
The creation of President Obama and his cloak of protection over the State of Israel have brought us to the brink of a global war that threatens to extinguish permanently all life on the planet.
The unseen collective pressure by that group of small minded mental unstable collectors of Power and Greed will tip the precarious balance, causing the finger, controlled ostensibly by an individual mind, to press the button that will bring about nuclear Armageddon. When the individual minds of all living beings are weighted, if peaceful minds are more predominant, the world will tend to be at peace; Without Obama and the present Israeli Government there would be less wars less violence, however they are there and have the power collected around them as a collector of precious toys their violent minds are more predominant now and the world will tend to be at war soon.
==================================================================
14-05-2011
Attacks on a mosque is even in the Muslim countries a act that is seen as an attack against the principles of the learning's of Prophet Mohammed. The fact that this does happen shows that here is not a religion principle on stake but revenge or political one.
In that same principle that a Muslim would never attack a Muslim institution. That this does happen is again not an act of a religion person but an act of revenge or politics. What better way for a foreign power to use the differentness between sections of the same religion to stir trouble to hide the real issue. The main issue mostly being Power and Greed.
Look at the British they have for many years hold that position in Northern Ireland, where it was used as an cover when there was political trouble in the English parliament and the Government needed to get the attention directed to somewhere else. And it was done successfully.
It was the previous Government of Blair in Britain who managed to contain and nearly abolish the hate between the two religions in Northern Ireland. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants, whereas by the protestant still managed via criminal activities to get the most of the attention, they were also the last to decommission their arms.
The present Government of Cameron seems to need the trouble back, hence the permission for the Protestants Orangist to march through Roman Catholics areas. This would not happening in any other civilized society as they would respect each other religion unless violence instigated by foreign interest, such as we see in the Middle East. The excuse of the Orangists does not hold water as the saying goes, their reason to violate other peoples peace because of what did happen such a 350 years ago. It is the celebration of an Original foreign King (Dutch) victory over an English King.
In more civilized societies this celebration would have been rearranged in a neutral area as a day or days out for the whole family. Not so in Northern Ireland where it is used with British Government help to intimidate the Irish Roman Catholics. If then the Roman catholic population react as on every action will come an reaction, then the organizers the Orangists and the permission and protecting authority blame the roman Catholics. Their heading is that the Orangist does nothing else then marching, by forgetting to mention that is was to intimidate and to anger people through Roman Catholic areas.
If the excuse of the Orangist would be upheld as it was now by the Cameron Government, even if it was to cover up their kick the poor changes. Then the KKK in the US could under that principle go on burning crosses and killing people as that also was a tradition out of a religion perspective.
This is the same in Iran, their also are foreign agent active to drive religion sections against each other as it would divide the Countries Government and takes their attention away from the real foreign action, invasion preparation. We have seen that successful done in Iraq were the Americans successful used the section of religion to kill each other by creating an attack that they then blamed on the section of the religion they wanted to be attacked. We see it in Israel who does on daily scale exactly the same by dividing Jews and Muslims.
The last election in Iran was marred by protests, strange enough if a protest was reported there was always a foreign reporter or a former Iranian now American on the spot. The US/UK led disturbance of the election failed by a better control of the Iran Government. This was however not so in some Eastern Europe Countries were the US successful managed to get the result they wanted. Money talks, and more money gets actions, and many people are willing to kill for even more money. It is the old terrorist principle successfully used by the US to destroy populations and Governments. We see that daily in Afghanistan, were a puppet Government obeys the US wishes, ignored the US atrocities and condemn their own people fight back.
In WW2 when Germany had covered most of Europe, they were called an occupation force, and the citizen of the countries who tried to fight back, resistance.
In Afghanistan, the occupational force is called the liberation for democracy and the citizen who fight back, terrorists.
It depends who is winning at the moment, if Germany had won in WW2 than Churchill would have been hanged as a war criminal. As said it depends on which side you stands. That is the same with the victims in such a war.
In WW2 more than 25 million people were killed part of them were Jewish, however they scream loudest and therefore the other death are never remembered, but they did die.
In Iraq and Afghanistan as it will be in Iran after the war coalition of the US, UK and Israel have had their hand on it, the soldiers who died are remembered, the tens of thousands innocent civilian victims are forgotten. The attacking soldiers celebrated as heroes for killing unarmed woman and children, the killed population dumped in a mass grave. That is unless that unholy trio would lose.
This now on this moment happening in Iran. The western news papers as always controlled by the Governments will launch fantasy after fantasy story about Iran. A death penalty will be cover the front pages of the Western News papers for days to come. A fantasy crime will be invented as simple telling the truth is not in the US interest therefore the hanged murderer is suddenly just an innocent gay figure.
That at the same time the death penalty is done to an US prisoner for a crime his lawyers said he could not have been done, is simple not talked about.
It is not so that we defend the death penalty in Iran, or anywhere else for that matter, the record of Iran but also that of the US is too bad to cover over it.
Take Mehdi Karroubi an obvious US sympathy who for some unknown reason before the last election in Iran suddenly had a solid capital to fight that election, who was seen in company of UK and US agents, who was always there were the cameras were planned. This is a prime example of what money can do such a person rightly or wrongly will switch side's even sells his country to get it.
There are too many such US sympathies in Iran just as there are too many foreign agents with bags full of money and promises going around. The rumors that they even fund the Jundollah in the south are a several times over proven fact. And although the US condemned the latest attack, and they would, would they? And while Jundollah denies the US links the way both deny the allegations proofs the point.
Let us not forget it is not the US but Israel who stirs up the problems time after time, not because there is a problem but Israel lives from the creation of stories to proof how dangerous the world is regarding Israel. The fact is that the antics from Israel their arrogance, violence and lack of respect for human life does created a worldwide anger and antipathy against them. However that is something they have done from the day they were first a tribe and have not stopped yet.
In fact they have created and still create in any country they went to in the past as well in present always problems. They do not fight on the streets; no they infiltrate organizations and Governments. And any country that does not want to obey Israel is automatically anti-Semitic. The fact that 90% of the Jews living now in Israel are of European decent and blood simple is ignored to suit the purpose.
The other simple fact that is ignored is that Israel is one of the most aggressive and violent states in the world and that 90% of all problems in the world have their roots back to Israel. The fact is obvious Israel needs a fight as they slowly loosing the ones against Gaza.
They either have to take on Lebanon again under the heading that Hezbollah is a danger to Israel; however they have tried that before and lost. The other possibility is to attack Iran. It will be obvious that Israel on his own would not survive this; they have no friends in the world then the US and maybe the UK although they cannot count on that.
The scenario that could work is that they launch from their in the Persian sea based nuclear submarine, a nuclear war head to somewhere in Iran. Then while the Iranian authorities are occupied with rescue works, the US army, also already with an enormous force in the Persian sea could attack the oil region of Iran at the border of Iraq. The US fleet in the Persian gulf has tanks and armored vehicles on board, which are not needed for sea patrols, therefore the only other explanation is an already planned attack on Iran, as usual under cover as the US and Israel always do.
If that does happen, then Russia will regret that they sided with the US against Iran. They will have a war near their borders for many years to come. It will also destabilize the Georgian area, as the mad dictator of Georgia will attack Ossetia and Abkhazia again while they also will have their eye on Armenia. Russian has recognized the states as in depended states and guaranteed protection for Abkhazia and Ossetia. It would leave Russia no choice than to act against Georgia. The Israeli contingent in Georgian would then scream, again, that there is a pogrom against them by the Russians. This will activate State's like Germany, which in turn could call for NATO activation.
That will activate states like the Dutch, as the mad dictator is married to a Dutch citizen, followed by the UK always willing to get into a fight even if it kills them.
Together they have then created WW3. And as we already know the ones who will win are the good ones even if they were the bad ones and the ones who loose are the bad ones even if they were the good ones. It is not war that counts as a result but who has the power, even if it kills all.
==================================================================
16-05-2011
Can it be correct?
Is there a God? If there is a God how do we know?
Those are the questions on the mind of millions of people all over the world.
Absolute proof is simple not possible not for any of mankind. This is simple an area of having to believe, having the feeling that somewhere there is a God who cares and protect.
It cannot be proven nor demonstrated that there is a God. We can make up proof; we can make suggestions, which do look like proof but evidence we do have not. Nobody has.
How do we know that there is a God man will ask? The answer is simple, look in your hearth, look around you to nature and you will feel it.
There are examples as well that God protect and cares.
There are also examples, which do show that it looks that God does not cares or protect. It is the way you look at it.
If you look for a God who will give you long life good health and lots of money, look somewhere else or join a creation research group and help to sell articles and books, that way you can have the money and make people and maybe yourself to believe that you indeed believe in God. But do you, really?
Is there a God, man can ask when he while skating on a large frozen lake with a group of people, and being far in front, suddenly stops with skating and just let him self slide out to the side of a small island in the lake. And if you then look back to the others and see them standing hundreds of yards away on the side of a large open space of water. The space you just slide over. Ice that by underwater stream was thinned and washed away. And if you then realize that, if you had made one move instead of sliding, that you would have been in deep water and probably frozen under ice. Then do you ask is there a God who just protected me?
Obvious the answer is yes. The careful one's will say maybe.
Is there a God man can ask when you are standing leaning against a wall talking to another, when a heavy truck breaks through his breaks and rolls fast backwards to you and the wall you lean against. Was it God when less then an inch before you would be hid by the truck, the truck suddenly sways away from you to the side, saving you from an certain death.
Again, obvious it was. Even the careful one's one will not say maybe.
Is there a God man can ask when driving from the mini state of Andorra in the South of France and the North of Spain, into Spain when suddenly when the road makes a sudden sharp turn to the left, you brakes are failing and your speed is to high to let the handbrake do the job. Was it the hand of God when you facing the oncoming wall with increasing speed, faster rolling towards a rock wall of the mountains, and suddenly the engine cuts out and the car still in forced reverse gear comes to a sudden halt just inches from the rock wall and sudden death or serious harm.
It was, no doubt.
However do we have to create a fantasy story around this god, do we need thousands of writers slinging out epistles full of creation rubbish, yes they do there is money to be made. Organizations who give themselves fantastic names in order to sell their creation stories based on what?
Why not simple believe that there is a God.
Not the god of Adam and Eve, there is grave doubt that they ever existed other than in the first writings made up by the clergy meeting of Hebrews an odd two and a half thousand years ago.
There are many histories world wide, from the south Americas, China India and Europe. Those histories with their deities and prophets are taken for what they are history nothing else. Why taken the history of the Hebrews as a lead for the presence of God, while the history of the Hebrews is more or less the same as that of old Babylon, and no doubt taken over from that but filled in with there own names and situations.
In theology and philosophy we have the undertaking that we accept the law of cause and effect.
The main question being is, WHY?
The proof is that every effect has a cause, therefore it all had to be started with a single first clause. However, is it not just that what the evolutionist say that did happen? It all started with the first clause and effect that via evolution evolved the world as we have today.
So what is the problem? The problem is that the creationist uses an old story from people of thousands of years ago to proof there was no first cause.
No first cause as God created all.
However did he? Or did he create the first cause and left it to evolution to follows the natural way. Not only we can have great doubts about the Bible story, there are great doubts about the Bible story even by creationist. Therefore even religion leaders slowly adjust the Bible to make it more acceptable.
For example it is now widely accepted in Creation as well in Religion circles that the God in the Bible did not create all of here on earth.
He now created animals and humans and made light, earth was already there and the seas filled with large creatures.
For that reason the Hebrew word of Bara is transform from creating to forming. It is in simple facts creation science by creating alterations to suit the purpose.
Cause is not traceable as the vent of a cause always point to another cause, which cause was then created by another cause and so we can go on forever. The end is the First cause.
Therefore it would be obvious that the First Cause was the beginning, as even the First Cause would have an effect.
We like to point out that Cause would be eradicated if there were no effect. Nothing would be possible if there was only a Cause and no effect.
There is no choice, whatever way we turn the ball it stays round, therefore there is one primary Cause, the First Cause.
================================================================
18-05-2011
Are journalist just making up the stories? The answer has to be yes,they do indeed.
Take Libya, a country nicely restoring themselves from a not so nice past, did their part already in the UN security council with the USA permission. They own and control the the UN after all. Then just a couple of months ago they were praised for their excellent Human Rights record.
It must be about on that time that the US decided that it was time to have a go at the oil from Libya, special while they just had announced the control to go 100 % in Libyan hands. So the US made a deal with the despot of Qatar to supply money and the US the arms via Dubai, to certain groups in Egypt and the land near Libya's border. The rebellion was set into motion and it was expected that just as in Tunisia and Egypt it would be just a matter of time before they had their claws into the Libya oil. It was here that it went wrong, the mainly foreign rebellion,filled in with USA educated Americans from Libyan origin, was not prepared to get slaughtered by the Libyan troops who were defending their country.
Here it get interesting, France that had his eyes on the Libyan oil for a long time, persuaded Lebanon the old colony still under French control (un-official) to make a claim \by the UN for an NO FLY zone over Libyan. This is a similar story as the WMD used in Iraq, it was not true but used anyway, the slaughtering of the people of Benghazi by Libyan troops. It was never done nor was there any intention by Libya to do so, but the Western press under supervision of the USA, (who else) spreading this story, which was a complete CIA fabrication but used just as the WMD in Iraq to get the UN behind the plan. China and Russia could have stopped the slaughter by the NATO of civilians, bur China was under pressure of their currency and Russia under pressure of their WTO membership so they abstained. The slaughter was approved by the UN.
The television, the news papers and the Internet are the media nowadays which are looked at and watched most. Television and the internet are both items which were invented to entertain, to make ourselves and other to feel good. Then it was discovered that it also could be used to spread any form of false information under the aural of respectability of the News Media and so we now are following the news on the Internet the newspapers and the mobile phone. We have our own selected sides channels and newspapers based on or point of view in the world. We form our opinions on what we see, and the ones who are seeing only their side will not question what they are shown or what they read.Most people form themselves an opinion without asking themselves of what they are watching is actual true!
For the one who are reading or watching both sides of the opinions, the picture gets more complicated, more curios by every day passed by. Even by the observed person seeing only one side of the debate it will be obvious that something is not as it should be.
The truth is not being told.
We have leaders who persuade us to believe that they acting in our best interest and that they with the help of God will bring us prosperity and protection. Then we find out that that means killing people, invading other peoples countries, and if those countries complain they are slaughtered. It has always been the philosophy of leaders that what they say is right and what others say is a lie. So that the winner is always right and the looser is always lying, even if it is accepted that it is the truth we are still told it is a lie. Although the winner is always right it does not mean that it is the truth, they will still say it is the truth even if we all know it is a lie. So when is the truth a lie and when is a lie the truth?
It does there for not really matter who starts a conflict, as the general rule is simple.
The winner was telling the truth even if it is knowingly a lie and the looser was lying even if it was knowingly the truth. One side will tell their supporters it was the other side, just as the other side will do.
So both could be lying and both could be telling the truth. The real truth will be somewhere in between, while both sides try to score points not hesitating to drag other political figures of the other side through the mud.
The other side will do exactly the same by also using the weirdest and most stupid remarks to accentuate a point, a point they do not have.
We found the explanation of how to express a lie.
Here it goes; A lie is only a lie when it is quit obvious believed not to be the truth, however, the lie is not a lie when others believe the lie is in fact the truth. And now the whole clarity of the question of what is a lie and what is the truth is hidden in a thick fog.
Out of the above it will be clear that every lie can be the truth and that every truth can be in fact a lie, just depending on what side you stand and what principles you have. It will be clear that the border between lie and truth is made almost invisible and that almost nobody can establish what is a lie or what is the truth. For leaders it is made much more easier, all they have to do is to pack the lie into a great story line and it will be seen as the truth, pack the lie in an acceptable packet and it will accepted as the truth. Leaders are able to do that, look at what G W Bush and Tony Blair managed to let the people believe. If they had lost they both would be tried for war crimes. However they won, so nobody bothers them and as they have the judges of the WCT in Den Hague in their pocket, nobody will bother them.
Leaders of Countries are not interested in the truth or lie for that matter, but only in the way they can present a lie as the truth so that the people will believe it. They create the truth as they want the people to see it. Look at Osama's killing. An older sick man unarmed is undressed beaten to pulp, and then shot at close range. However, the way they showed it the world was that he was a dangerous man. If something goes wrong you blame others as they were not telling the truth.
The great example is the credit crunch the recession. The leaders blame the banks. However, it was not the banks, they only did what they were supposing to do making money and lots of it. The leaders were not telling and are still not telling the truth. They should have regulated the banks long time ago. The leaders were warned many of times that the banks were taking financial risks. They could have curtailed the amounts of lending, the height of the charges, the maximum of mortgages. They did not do so they failed. The leaders should have curtailed the utility companies who screwed up their prices to a ridicules height, but again the leaders did not do anything than playing the blame game. Special in the UK, one of the countries hardest hit by the downfall, the leader could have done a lot of things to stop the Utility Companies from grabbing a fortune.
The leaders are blaming the international banking, and although that can be partly correct their uncontrollable greed did not stop the incredible rise of the oil and gas prices, they could have done that, but that would have effected their own pockets. The same leaders, wants actions against the Fat Cats, while they are in fact the fat cats. Whole countries are suffering under the recession, income is down in real terms, wages are going down, and spending is less. Except for the deputies of the people and their Governments their income is not going down, their spending is not going down, but they sneer at the normal people, hitting it with all kind of hidden taxes.
Leaders should have enough brains or common sense that if spending is down and people are going bankrupt you do not hit them with extra hidden taxes. In fact the only groups which are not going down in income or spending are the groups who created the recession; the Government and the deputies of the people, the Utility Companies, the Landlord, the banks. All others are hit although they did not create the problem. Do the leaders do anything to reduce those incomes that profit those fat cats, no they do not.
It is presented as the truth while all can see it is a lie.
The US/UK leaders will argue that there must be no protectionism; it must for the good of the whole world. Man can argue that a leader of the US who promised less wars more freedom and more people power. A leader who obtained himself a Peace price and after that drastic increased the wars in the world curtailed the USA peoples freedom and managed to set the whole of the Middle East alight. The UK elections and the appointment for an PM failed to select a winner, so the leader of one party promised the world to another small party, so that he could appoint himself as the PM for the UK on less then 30% of the UK citizens vote.He then appointed himself to be the leader of the UK. The people would expect that he would have the duty to put his own country first. European, Chinese, Russian and most of the other countries do so. But no not in the UK, there the leader throws still money around as of there is a bottom less pit full of money for him to spent. And against his own promises started a new war for which the USA nor the UK had the money.
In the UK, the self appointed PM raised the taxes sharply, curtailed the freedom of the people, and managed what no PM had done ever before to impoverish the UK population at such that they are now second of the top of most impoverished Western countries, just after the USA. The higher taxes should have been spend on the people in the crunch of the recession. Instead he did spent it on all kind of projects, such as helping the rich helping the banks, the rich social landlords, the utility companies,Every country in the world he could think of but not on the people, they have to do with promises and as the last couple of months have shown, empty promises, and more hidden taxes.
For an outsider it looks that the UK leader is simple an a ego trip, to make himself look like a great statesman and no doubt he will after the meeting tell us that he now has saved the world on his own, and the UK and the world are now in save hands. Then he will climb the stage and will claim that he is the best, the saviour of the world and only he can save all of us. It is time to run for the exit doors, while at that door the UK leader will stand and ask the UK citizen for the money to foot the billion plus bill, as that will have to be paid by the tax payer. That this taxpayer does not have anything to give any more is not of his concern, there can always be another hidden tax put in place, to fill his pockets. Obvious, he does not have to pay for his ego trip himself as he is the great celebrated leader, and so we all have our dreams.
At the end of that meeting when all the leaders have promised to save the world and to make it cleaner, they are jumping in their jets and under a smog of fuel clouds are on their way home. The UK citizen covered in the pollution of those jets are standing there coughing and with watery eyes and empty stomachs.
However, not any of the leaders will have seen the truth or admitted the lie, as for them the lie is the truth and the truth is the lie. War means getting the attention away from the real problems and it can be making profit at the same time for the leaders not the people, they are cut on both sides. At least the Middle East population have now understood the message and want a change rightly or wrongly, but at least they see the light. The population of the USA and the UK are still asleep and will not wake up, just as the German people between 1928 and 1945, before it is too late.
=================================================================
20-05-2011
The faith of Buddhism now spread over nearly the entire world. It is now estimated that the number of Buddhists has now passed the 500 million. Others keep it on slightly lower then this but in general it is safe to say that near 500 million is a reasonable estimate.
Although there are many branches, two of them are rising far above the rest. The school of the Elders (Theravada) and The Great Vehicle (Mahayana).
Theravada has a widespread following, whilst Mahayana, which include the tradition Nichiren Buddhism, Tibetan Buddhism, The Pure Land, Shingon, Zen, and Tendai. Two others have to be mentioned although they are in principle part of the Mahayana they are Vajrayana and Shinnyo-en.
Outsiders see Buddhism as a movement faith of peace and meditation.
Just as the Christian and Judaic religion they have been told Thou shall not Kill. Or as the first precept states: In undertake to refrain from taking life. However just as the Christians and the Judaic religion they broke that command time after time.
The different being that the Christian and the Judaic religion were proud on their killings and called it a glorious wins, a triumph. The Buddhist calls it a sad occasion to have to kill, and then goes on killing till they have reached were they were aiming for.
Where the Christian and the Judaic religions will celebrate their wins forever and ever, the Buddhist will say, we are aware of the suffering caused by the destruction of life. We are committed to cultivate compassion and learn ways to protect the lives of people, animals, plants and minerals. Therefore we are determined not to kill, or help others to kill, and not to condone any act of killing in the world, in thinking, and in the way of life.
It does not stop them for creating situations in which many are killed and harmed. However as Buddhism is a Faith a statement of a belief, one totally focuses on personal salvation. As such it is solely based on behaviours that promote actions that encourage salvation.
Buddhism, what is in fact an extension with new adding\u2019s of the Vedic Religion. It took over many of the concepts of the Vedic Religion under which the concept of Karma. Karma in simple form means that all actions have consequences, negative or positive.
Killing for example is negative and to many negatives brings negative consequences in future reincarnation. In short they all will aim for the Nirvana or at least a human return. This is the main reason that they are in words against killings it can be fatal to their aims.
It will be obvious, that the aim not to kill or to advice not to kill is aimed at their own salvation and therefore central to the practice of that Faith.
The so many times over and over pressed story that Buddhists are against war is in simple terms not true.
The Mahayana Buddhism doctrine has always served as a base for war.
Look at China were the belief led to various rebellions attacks in favour of the countries communities. Many Buddhist cults from time to time rebelled against any ruling dynasty. Look at Japan, Buddhism accepted and trained the samurai warrior. They manipulated political situation and had the hand in violent confrontations among competing sects.
Maybe their first rule may be to refrain from killings themselves, but activating killings by others will not hold them back. The emperors such as Harsha of Kanauj and Dharmapala of Binhar and Bengal, they waged many of year\u2019s simple for the expansion, despite of their status as Buddhists. Look at Ceylon now, Buddhists fighting against Buddhists.
No talking there about negative or positive Karma.
It is save to say that although the Buddhist say that there is no justification for war in the Buddhist teachings, they do support and have supported strategic situations to reap the benefits.
For this look as an example to Burma and Tibet, look at Sri Lanka were the Buddhists are actively involved.
The Buddhist morality is based on certain principles, not on rules.
The principles as they see it are those as in the precepts and the Four Immeasurable's. If they have to violate the principles then that is regrettable as it can be negative for Karma. However it is not positive to stand aside while people are maimed and killed. So the principle of being peaceful can be and only will be stand if it suits the Buddhist.
If we take this further does it also means that the principle of not killing only stands if it suits the Buddhist, after all it is the duty of a Buddhist to find all possible ways to solve an problem, before the weapon is taken up. It does mean that in principle the Buddhist have the same principles as any other person on the world. This regardless of what kind of Religion that person belongs to.
They all prefer peace; they all will kill if needed.
This does not affect their Karma, as they do not do the killings themselves. They are not responsible for other who do the killing accidental or by purpose. They are responsible for their own Karma. It has nothing to do with the instigator. It must be seen, as with the samurai in Japan it was not the teaching from Buddha that created the samurai. The Buddhists were the instigators for the rise and creation of the samurai.
Again the principle is the same, the Buddhist not himself does the actions to the killing they only instigate. Therefore, their Karma stays in positive, while the result of their actions is negative for others. The actions of the Dalai Lama are a prime example of this principle.
Instigate actions; promote actions but stay out of the action himself directly. His Karma stays positive his Nirvana guaranteed.
To make it to understand, we do not judge the Tibet question. The Buddhist can have the fullest of right on their side, and without offering a judgment they probably have. We only want to show that Buddhists are people just as we all are.
The fact that prefers to have the killing done by someone else to keep their Karma in tact is what set them aside. Not as peaceful Buddhists, but as masters of delegating the killing.
===================================================================
22-05-2011
Every religion has his own statements regarding the peace in the world, they see it all happening at a different way.
The Buddhism teaches us that whether we have global peace or war is up to us to make the different s. They see the situation not as hopeless and out of control. From the Buddhist point of view, if we don't do anything, who else will?
Peace or war is not our decision. The decisions are made by a small group of mental unstable persons who do not have any form of conviction or believe, although they sometimes present themselves as fighters for peace. However that is to please people to get support they need.
The fundamental goal of Buddhism is peace, peace in heaven and peace on earth. The Buddha taught that the first step on the path to peace is understanding war. When we understand what causes war we know what causes peace, then we know where to direct our efforts. In other words, we can take our actions in our quest for peace. But if we do not first address the fundamental issues of war, then all other actions to find peace will come to nothing.
Buddha taught us that a peaceful mind lead to a peaceful speech and peaceful actions.
If the minds of living beings are at peace, the world will be at peace. But who has a mind at peace? The main stream of the population live in the middle of a daily struggle to survive with only small and precious moments for brief and treasured moments. Even the holy persons whose minds should be at peace are in reality in turmoil, hence their constant initiatives for calling of peace. If we would wait for certain groups in the world to become sages, then there is no chance of a peace in the world for us.
Obvious against the learning's of Buddha, if our minds are not completely peaceful then there is no possibility to reduce the levels of war in the world. Even the Buddhist are not free of un-peaceful thinking as behind many violence, uprising and war stand a Buddhist group in support. Even during Buddha's life time, he was indirect involved in the strategies of uprising and war.
Nichiren an 11th century Buddhist of high intellect, but issued with an stubborn un-peaceful feeling against other Buddhist groups and the Government, was the center of controversy that landed him time after time in conflict with other Buddhist groups and the Government. I nearly cost him his life but was saved by his sadly untimely death.
Buddha saw life and death as a born and reborn of life. Just as, animals can, in certain circumstances, be reborn as human beings. Unfortunately if that is correct then it could explain the animal aggression that some war makers have, look at the USA and Israel, the two most aggressive countries in the present world.
The causes of war are always the same although many different excuses or reasons are given, excuses and reasons too numerous even to list, the real cause is always greed and power. Either to take what the other has or the fear that the other one will be growing stronger and could have more power. Whatever excuse whatever reason given the real cause is always Greed and Power?
War is not something abstract. War is against one group or another. The reasons for war are always the same. We have now started to feed data into a computer and analyze of and when we can start a war and what will be the result at such a war can be started and directed according to logical programming into a computer. It is individuals who decide to wage war. Even if the war is global, its beginning can be traced back to the decisions of individuals. All wars are always the result of a small group of mental unstable people acting out of a graving for Power and Greed.
The doctrine of karma teaches that force and violence, even to the level of killing, never solves anything. The same doctrine also makes it clear that Karma does not object to force and violence. It is therefore that Buddhist says they do not fight, however a war is not alone about fighting. It is also persuasion convincing and support it is here were the Buddhist is at its strongest path. Killing creates fear and anger, which creates more killing, more fear, and more anger, in a continues cycle.
Buddha's point is that if you kill your enemy in this life, he is reborn, seeks revenge, and kills you in the next life. However, there is a floor in that way of thinking; nobody knows who is born where and when. Therefore the enemy you killed does not know you or even knows of you are still existing or still have to be reborn and as what. If the people of one nation invade and kill or subjugate the people of another nation, sooner or later the time will come for the people of the conquered nation to wreak their revenge upon the conquerors. That is a fact and history shows us this over and over again. Never ever has there been a war that brought a positive end to a problem.
Therefore, although the principle of peace should be foremost on every bodies mind and their thought and action and reaction should be directed towards peace. It is not possible as long as there are small groups in charge of countries despite their limited mental capacities who are desperate for Power and Greed. Those people do not care of their own people die, their own people starving or losing all what they have. They want one thing Power and Greed, Greed and Power.
No Buddha in the world can alter this, No teachings of Buddha can alter this they know it but they still are activating the youngsters to believe that a universal peace would be possible. Reality by that Buddhist leader will not prevent them from collecting more youngsters to their vault. Those Buddhist leaders are also searching for more power, power for themselves and for their group. Therewith they violate the fist teaching of Buddha, PEACE. If those youngsters are in then they are in, and the change that they will escape is remote, as more and more yarns are spin around them until they cannot see reality anymore.
If at a certain point in time reality set in, then this are the ones who will be on the forefront of the war for Power and Greed. The principle, this as an example, is used by the Soka Gakkai International, an organization for global power and the Greed for more power. They using a slogan the: Nam-myoho-renge-kyo as a possible quick rich scheme. Or as they say it if you chant than the Buddha state emerges from within.... and contribute to a creative and peaceful society.
It does sound fantastic for the ones who sitting on a dead track, in a life without progress or hope, however it does not exist in reality. The reality is completely different; they are still the ones on a dead track without progress or hope. However they have each other in a group, they lean at each other and life feels better for some of them. For others, they leave family and friends as soon as they are in the SGI vault, Daughters leave parents, sons suddenly leave home, and grandchildren do not visit their grandparents anymore. They steal money from their parents under the most fantastic excuses, as soon as they have it they simple disappear and the money never is returned.
This is the experienced reality of SGI, destroyed family life, families at war, not much peace here. And the president of the SGI is still telling the world he wants peace, while at the same time he is creating war.
The emotions of those family wars created by the Buddhist SGI translate into more and more hate and family feuds; this is the same with wars as the weapons of killing become more and more sophisticated the level of killings will go up. For example, the President of the US loses his temper, and as a result hundreds of thousands will lose their lives their livelihood. His remarks concerning Iran speaks for them, and then again his is on good terms with the Dalai Lama. Would he be able to tell how many unnecessary lives will be lost, how many lives will lost as the result of the employment of our modern weaponry.
The creation of President Obama and his cloak of protection over the State of Israel have brought us to the brink of a global war that threatens to extinguish permanently all life on the planet.
The unseen collective pressure by that group of small minded mental unstable collectors of Power and Greed will tip the precarious balance, causing the finger, controlled ostensibly by an individual mind, to press the button that will bring about nuclear Armageddon.
When the individual minds of all living beings are weighted, if peaceful minds are more predominant, the world will tend to be at peace; Without Obama and the present Israeli Government there would be less wars less violence, however they are there and have the power collected around them as a collector of precious toys their violent minds are more predominant now and the world will tend to be at war soon.
===================================================================
24-05-2011
Attacks on a mosque is even in the Muslim countries a act that is seen as an attack against the principles of the learning's of Prophet Mohamed. The fact that this does happen shows that here is not a religion principle on stake but revenge or political one.
In that same principle that a Muslim would never attack a Muslim institution. That this does happen is again not an act of a religion person but an act of revenge or politics. What better way for a foreign power to use the differentness between sections of the same religion to stir trouble to hide the real issue. The main issue mostly being Power and Greed.
Look at the British they have for many years hold that position in Northern Ireland, where it was used as an cover when there was political trouble in the English parliament and the Government needed to get the attention directed to somewhere else. And it was done successfully.
It was the previous Government of Blair in Britain who managed to contain and nearly abolish the hate between the two religions in Northern Ireland. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants, whereas by the protestant still managed via criminal activities to get the most of the attention, they were also the last to decommission their arms.
The present Government of Cameron seems to need the trouble back, hence the permission for the Protestants Orangist to march through Roman Catholics areas. This would not happening in any other civilized society as they would respect each other religion unless violence instigated by foreign interest, such as we see in the Middle East. The excuse of the Orangists does not hold water as the saying goes, their reason to violate other peoples peace because of what did happen such a 350 years ago. It is the celebration of an Original foreign King (Dutch) victory over an English King.
In more civilized societies this celebration would have been rearranged in a neutral area as a day or days out for the whole family. Not so in Northern Ireland where it is used with British Government help to intimidate the Irish Roman Catholics. If then the Roman catholic population react as on every action will come an reaction, then the organizers the Orangists and the permission and protecting authority blame the roman Catholics. Their heading is that the Orangist does nothing else then marching, by forgetting to mention that is was to intimidate and to anger people through Roman Catholic areas.
If the excuse of the Orangist would be upheld as it was now by the Cameron Government, even if it was to cover up their kick the poor changes. Then the KKK in the US could under that principle go on burning crosses and killing people as that also was a tradition out of a religion perspective.
This is the same in Iran, their also are foreign agent active to drive religion sections against each other as it would divide the Countries Government and takes their attention away from the real foreign action, invasion preparation. We have seen that successful done in Iraq were the Americans successful used the section of religion to kill each other by creating an attack that they then blamed on the section of the religion they wanted to be attacked. We see it in Israel who does on daily scale exactly the same by dividing Jews and Muslims.
The last election in Iran was marred by protests, strange enough if a protest was reported there was always a foreign reporter or a former Iranian now American on the spot. The US/UK led disturbance of the election failed by a better control of the Iran Government. This was however not so in some Eastern Europe Countries were the US successful managed to get the result they wanted. Money talks, and more money gets actions, and many people are willing to kill for even more money. It is the old terrorist principle successfully used by the US to destroy populations and Governments. We see that daily in Afghanistan, were a puppet Government obeys the US wishes, ignored the US atrocities and condemn their own people fight back.
In WW2 when Germany had covered most of Europe, they were called an occupation force, and the citizen of the countries who tried to fight back, resistance.
In Afghanistan, the occupational force is called the liberation for democracy and the citizen who fight back, terrorists.
It depends who is winning at the moment, if Germany had won in WW2 than Churchill would have been hanged as a war criminal. As said it depends on which side you stands. That is the same with the victims in such a war.
In WW2 more than 25 million people were killed part of them were Jewish, however they scream loudest and therefore the other death are never remembered, but they did die.
In Iraq and Afghanistan as it will be in Iran after the war coalition of the US, UK and Israel have had their hand on it, the soldiers who died are remembered, the tens of thousands innocent civilian victims are forgotten. The attacking soldiers celebrated as heroes for killing unarmed woman and children, the killed population dumped in a mass grave. That is unless that unholy trio would lose.
This now on this moment happening in Iran. The western news papers as always controlled by the Governments will launch fantasy after fantasy story about Iran. A death penalty will be cover the front pages of the Western News papers for days to come. A fantasy crime will be invented as simple telling the truth is not in the US interest therefore the hanged murderer is suddenly just an innocent gay figure.
That at the same time the death penalty is done to an US prisoner for a crime his lawyers said he could not have been done, is simple not talked about.
It is not so that we defend the death penalty in Iran, or anywhere else for that matter, the record of Iran but also that of the US is too bad to cover over it.
Take Mehdi Karroubi an obvious US sympathy who for some unknown reason before the last election in Iran suddenly had a solid capital to fight that election, who was seen in company of UK and US agents, who was always there were the cameras were planned. This is a prime example of what money can do such a person rightly or wrongly will switch side's even sells his country to get it.
There are too many such US sympathies in Iran just as there are too many foreign agents with bags full of money and promises going around. The rumors that they even fund the Jundollah in the south are a several times over proven fact. And although the US condemned the latest attack, and they would, would they? And while Jundollah denies the US links the way both deny the allegations proofs the point.
Let us not forget it is not the US but Israel who stirs up the problems time after time, not because there is a problem but Israel lives from the creation of stories to proof how dangerous the world is regarding Israel. The fact is that the antics from Israel their arrogance, violence and lack of respect for human life does created a worldwide anger and antipathy against them. However that is something they have done from the day they were first a tribe and have not stopped yet.
In fact they have created and still create in any country they went to in the past as well in present always problems. Look at the rebellion of Egypt, the president gone and still the rebellion is not over,hence the rebellion was in principle not against the president but against the USA principles. Look Yemen an USA friend and therefore left alone in the critics of the Western world, bu the problem is still ongoing.
Look Libya stirred and organized by the US with the help of France and Britain. Does it solve anything, no ofcourse not, but the country will be ruined and the oil in US hands. Look at Syria, another Israeli/US conspiracy to destroy a system and take the land and the oil. Next Algeria and Iran if they getting half the change. They do not fight on the streets; no they infiltrate organizations and Governments. And any country that does not want to obey Israel is automatically anti-Semitic. The fact that 90% of the Jews living now in Israel are of European decent and blood simple is ignored to suit the purpose.
The other simple fact that is ignored is that Israel is one of the most aggressive and violent states in the world and that 90% of all problems in the world have their roots back to Israel. The fact is obvious Israel needs a fight as they slowly loosing the ones against Gaza.
They either have to take on Lebanon again under the heading that Hezbollah is a danger to Israel; however they have tried that before and lost. The other possibility is to attack Iran. It will be obvious that Israel on his own would not survive this; they have no friends in the world then the US and maybe the UK although they cannot count on that.
The scenario that could work is that they launch from their in the Persian sea based nuclear submarine, a nuclear war head to somewhere in Iran. Then while the Iranian authorities are occupied with rescue works, the US army, also already with an enormous force in the Persian sea could attack the oil region of Iran at the border of Iraq. The US fleet in the Persian gulf has tanks and armored vehicles on board, which are not needed for sea patrols, therefore the only other explanation is an already planned attack on Iran, as usual under cover as the US and Israel always do.
If that does happen, then Russia will regret that they sided with the US against Iran and Libya. They will have a war near their borders for many years to come. It will also destabilize the Georgian area, as the mad dictator of Georgia will attack Ossetia and Abkhazia again while they also will have their eye on Armenia. Russian has recognized the states as in depended states and guaranteed protection for Abkhazia and Ossetia. It would leave Russia no choice than to act against Georgia. The Israeli contingent in Georgian would then scream, again, that there is a pogrom against them by the Russians. This will activate State's like Germany, which in turn could call for NATO activation.
That will activate states like the Dutch, as the mad dictator is married to a Dutch citizen, followed by the UK always willing to get into a fight even if it kills them.
Together they have then created WW3. And as we already know the ones who will win are the good ones even if they were the bad ones and the ones who loose are the bad ones even if they were the good ones. It is not war that counts as a result but who has the power, even if it kills all.
==================================================================
26-05-2011
As before the rebellion in the Republic of Georgia, did not reach the Western Media, it did naturally but the Western press totally controlled by the Western Governments did not allow the Media to report, so the Western Media do what they normally do make up the stories and present it as of it did happen. However the CIA controlled media in Georgia is presented with the fantasy stories straight out the pen of the CIA fairytale writers, all what the government controlled media in Georgia can do is to write down what they are told to write.
The Republic of Georgia is the Republic which is totalitarian ruled by an USA trained lawyer, and married to a Dutch woman.The president is the one who attempted to genocide the Ossetian population under cover of darkness, at the time that the whole world was watching the Opening of the Olympic Games in China.It had USA approval and we can safely mention that it was probably though-out and created by the USA. Strange enough to confirm this was the fact that although the US is quick enough to accuse anyone they do not like or who's countries wealth they want to accuse of crimes against humanity they did not so in the beyond doubt genocide attempt of the Georgian president, this proves the USA approval of the attempted genocide.
Several times in the last couple of years the Georgian people have tried to stand up against the dictator, who in action and visibility could be a double of Adolf Hitler, only the moustache is missing. Every time they hacked the rebellion down with the help of Israeli trained soldiers with American weapons. However the people of Georgia who are kept relative poor while the president rolls in wealth, had have enough and once more they made the attempt to rebel.That revolution has already started, Nino Burjanadze, leader of Democratic Movement-United Georgia and active member of the Representative Public Assembly, stated after an incident with protesters and police on Kostava Street and appealed to the rest of the oppositional political spectrum to join them. Alongside Burjanadze\u00e2's statements, another radical wing of the oppositional spectrum, the Georgian party named May 25 as the date on which the revolution will start. The army and police responded by opening fire on the demonstrators.
The Georgian political establishment and the population as a whole were anticipating with great interest the start which was announced as the beginning of the revolutionary process which would end in the change of the ruling administration. This was the initiative of the Public Assembly and its leading figure Nino Burjanadze. It is interesting that unlike previous attempts, today the change of the ruling forces is planned by the entire opposition. However it should be said from the very beginning that if Burjanadze fails to perform this promised revolution, it will be a defeat not only for Burjanadze and her party it would establish Georgia as an republic ruled by a despot with no opposition possible it frustrate all political opponents: radicals, moderates, Parliamentary or non-parliamentary opposition, the US/EU with Israeli military support would make sure of that. They need Georgia as the base to attack the Caucasus the next stage for the US/EU drive for oil. Oil that Russia has and that is wanted mainly by the US and the UK and who are using the EU as a lever to do just that. Their own terrorist organization the NATO would be sure of that.
The revolution has been launched and the authorities have started it, as they use criminal actions against us, we have only peaceful methods, Burjanadze said. During the incident the police fired on the demonstrators at least two died and many were injured. As the protesters have mentioned, the incident was imposed by provocations and police and army was already on the square before the demonstrators arrived. People presenting themselves as journalists and press photographers are identified as state employed staff, obvious to take statements and photographs to be used against the demonstrators. It is the same state employees who on facebook and twitter spreading around that Russia is financing the demonstrations, even the mentally absurd statement that a leader of the opposition should have received 13 million how mentally retarded can you get to make such statements,while the population is starving! The Georgian people who call them selves journalist(joke) write down what the government tells them to write, just as in the time of Adolf Hitler and they simple obey. As human you cannot sink any lower!
The street action starting on May 21 is in fact the first of its kind since the three-month long protest rallies in 2009. Back then as now the majority of the opposition was united, however, eventually its progress was frustrated due to the violent actions by the police and army and many arrested then are never to be seen again. The government then said the result of these 2009 actions has discredited the opposition movement as such and the ruling power, the president was victorious. In 2009, the frustration of their dreams was not just an ordinary defeat but it was the crisis of the entire strategy. The slogan, which has been active in Georgia since and during the Rose Revolution many people in the streets the ruling administration, failed this time. The violence and deadly actions taken by the police and army as it appeared fit Saakashvili and his team. The ruling administration did use much to much force, violent force against the protesters. It did raided the protesters camps used large scale attacks on the activists to show its power and to intimidate the protesters. As a result, the opposition members and first of all the people got tired, frustrated, disappointed, exhausted and the planned scenario failed. This spring there were two opposition forces promoting peaceful revolution the Georgian Party with a group of leaders Okruashvili, Kitsmarishvili, Subari, Gachechiladze, and Public Assembly, under Nino Burjanadze\u00e2's political leadership. Both of these forces want to drive Saakashvili out and want to establish an democracy however how is not clear as the army nor the police, Israeli trained with US arms would not be easy to persuade a change. And we all know how the Israeli's act against the Palestinians, with brute force and deaths. The USA policy does not much differ as we can see in Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan.
Burjanadze appealed to opposition leaders to forget earlier differences and join the rallies. As it turned out, oppositional leaders have accepted this appeal. Leaders of the Georgian Party, Levan Gachechiladze, and Koka Guntsadze joined the protest of the Representative Public Assembly at Public Broadcasting. Gachechiladze said that there is no time to bear old grudges and to demonstrate this he shook hands with Nino Burjanadze and kissed her. On its side, the Georgian Party has named May 25 as the day when they will launch street rallies. 25 May will be a menacing day, Sozar Subari, leader of the Georgian party said and called on society to gather on Avlabari square at midday on May 25.Subari says that the government has been dispersing the protest for a second day, with firing at the demonstrators and many arrests, active steps are needed to stop the terror of the dictator who is still leaning completely on the asurances of the Israeli, the USA and the Europeans to help him at all times.
The next move will be taken taken by Nino Burjanadze and the rest of the opposition. Burjanadze and her supporters claim that their efforts will be quick, but effective. She and her supporters also claim that on May 26 Independence Day of Georgia - things will be different. She claims that her supporters will not conduct illegal actions, warning the participants of the rallies against any provocations. However the president have started to make already many arrest and have said that no demonstrations are to be allowed and that if his words are not obeyed he will come down hard on the demonstrators. Of this threat of violence will deter demonstrators need to be seen, however as we have seen with the rebellion in Bahrain, if the USA is on the dictator's side the rebellion does not have a change, many people died there and if the USA have half the change many people will they here.
May 25 has been named as the date of returning to Georgia by one of the party leaders, former Defence Minister, Irakli Okruashvili (who has political asylum in France) to Georgia, Well be next to the people. On May 25 I will be in Georgia with my friends to end this government, he said. He has also released a written statement, which is an appeal to the Georgian army praising some of the sections of the Georgian soldiers for their courage, blaming personally President Saakashvili for losing the August 2008 genocide war and telling Georgian soldiers that Saakashvili hates you so much that he uses you for only holding military parades.In a few days the Georgian people will face Saakashvili and his government from the other side of a barricade. At that moment I will be standing beside my people, Okruashvili said, adding that he would do it even through it might pose a risk to his life. Georgia in the meantime have issued an arrest warrant against him.
But this is only one side of the scenario, where there is only pure enthusiasm, motivation and determination. But if administration does not go, and most probably due to the Israeli, USA, EU support it will not, is there another action plan? So far nobody from the any kind of opposition has openly discussed what should be done in case if events don't develop as desired. Burjanadze and her supporters are claiming that the ruling authorities, who are responsible for the events taking place in the country the many deaths and arrests, lead everything towards revolution. If it takes place all the responsibility will lie with the ruling dictator. People are ready to defend their constitutional rights without arms, peacefully. It looks like there is serious precondition for civil confrontation. The ruling power of course is quick to blame a Russian element noticeable in the situation and the confrontation already appeared. This is utterly rubbish and smells to USA media infiltration. Early in the morning of May 22, police forces attacked demonstrators in front of the Public Broadcaster TV station building, using bullets to hit the many demonstrators were two died and many were injured. So the situation currently is very complicated as neither side is ready to make concessions. Meanwhile most of the remaining oppositional forces are limiting themselves only by verbal comments. The demonstrators are unarmed while the surrounded army and police are heavy armed, the demonstrators know that the army would kill without hesitation.
However, the tide can be turned as aside from the radical opposition, statements have been made by their so called moderate counterparts,some Georgian Party leaders already joined the protest actions late Sunday afternoon. Our Georgia -Free Democrats released a statement regarding the incident that took place on the protest of People's Assembly and condemned the use of violence from the government and its alleged violation of civil rights. The fact that citizens of Georgia assembled to stage a demonstration, obviously depicts dissatisfaction of the Georgian society towards the government. We demand cessation of arresting people for political gain, kidnapping protesters, beating them in public and the torture of arrested demonstrators and we demand the release of these illegally imprisoned people, the statement reads.
They also call on the government not to use aggression against the people in the streets to avoid civil confrontation.
As for the authorities attitude, the Interior Minister gave an interview regarding the rallies, On May 21, Everybody saw that all those statements he made we presume, all those plans these people have are wrong and will not be taken serious by the president as he alone knows what is good for the country and the people. Therefore anyone who demonstrate commits a crime and will be arrested regardless. Therefore, we will have a reaction to these serious actions, which means that we will force them of the streets. The interview, was made at the time when protesters were marching from Freedom Square towards the Georgian Public Broadcaster.
Those people the minister said[referring to leaders of the ongoing rallies], who were making the statements, are very isolated from the society, it does show how far the Government of the Republic stand away from the people of the republic in fact we can say they do not have a clue. They receive the USA and the EU payments, pocket it and that's it. The minister said, the people they cannot understand and cannot see that the society is absolutely different today and there are no similar moods in the majority of the society and that we are not in the mood to change as it is not in our interest. Those people who are demonstrating or have the intend to do so have in fact not a clue of what is going on in the world, they are closed in one narrow circle and try cheating each other for their own benefit. We are not taking their demands and statements serious. Merabishvili said. These people are so few, so weak, so small that they cannot do anything to us neither with what they are saying nor they will do even a third of what they often threaten to do. Asked if there was any possibility of Georgia would be a democracy again, Merabishvili said the uprising it was not serious and it was not a threat at all, just the opposition letting of steam. However, there were 10,000 troops at stand by just in case it would turn into more then a circus.
Either this is an unprecedented bluff, or they have a joker in their hands- analyst Gia Khukhashvili states, The government leaders are too self confident, I can't exclude that they might have some joker, on which the Georgian society have no information. He has also touched upon Georgian billionaire, Bidzina Ivanishvili's statement on the 2008 election falsification and underlined the importance of it, it was criticism of the authorities. He had not made such a statement without some expecting a reaction. There is an impression that something might happen in the nearest days on which Georgian society has no idea. Then again the president of the republic has never stand away from his USA up-bring and the demonstrators can expect an USA reaction.
According to military analyst, Irakli Sesiashvili, "use of the country's armed forces in a critical situation is not only wrong it is not permitted; it is aimed only against foreign aggression or in the event of armed internal confrontation. It is therefore not to be understood why the army is on full alert as no armed threat is made against Georgia, either from the outside or from the inside. Thus, Okruashvili's appeal towards the army could be understood as a call to soldiers not no obey the authorities' demands if it decides to use them for inner confrontation, Sesiashvili said and also commented on Okruashvili's possible return to the country, I think that he will do what he has said. How he does this is his business. His coming back should be related to some concrete plan. If not it will result in his arrest and execution and the death for any uprising against the president, the USA/EU will make sure of that they depend on Georgia as an attack base to invade the North Caucasus, and therefore will protect the dictator with all what is possible!
===================================================================
28-05-2011
The U.S. should give Georgia's modern defense system, was said in an interview with Georgian television station Rustavi-2 " by the American Republican Congressman J. McCain. It is obvious that the failed genocide of the south Ossetian population was still circling in his head, if it had succeeded than the USA would have an direct access to the Russian state. As known it failed.
"Any country has the right to defend itself, including Georgia, the more so on its borders aggressive neighbor who occupy its territory," he went on well knowing that he was telling the larges of lies produced by the Corporative establishment in the USA,. South Ossetia and Abkhazia were already in depended since the same time as Georgia gained independence, they were never part of the Georgian independence. The USA knows that but they need the formed criminal and KGB informer Saakasvili to give them access to the Russian oil fields soon as possible. McCain with or without a brain knows this!
The Congressman also hopes to revitalize the French president, Nicolas Sarkozy, "to persuade Russia in the implementation of the ceasefire agreement on August 12, 2008 providing for the withdrawal of Russian troops to pre-war positions. He is well aware that the Russian have had withdrawn themselves and then ware asked to come back because of the Georgian/USA threat against South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The coward dictator of Republic of Georgia as Saakavili is, would place him in a position to attack again special now the President of Abkhazia just have died. He did it under the cover of the night while the world was watching the opening of the Chinese Olympic games, with his Israeli trained army with their USA given weapons. Facts never deter sad old people like McCain to tell lie after lie if they see profit in it, "They did not fulfilled the agreement, He said, Russia violated all international norms," he said. Again a lie from McCain is almost a complement for his intended victim. The USA broke all the norms and agreement and organized the genocide on the Ossetian people, a country that was in depended at that time and still is.
"I am disappointed by some European politicians who are still not required to address this issue and insisted on the implementation of the agreement," McCain said. The EU was already satisfied that Russia had withdrawn and was asked to protect the Abkhazia and South Ossetia borders, although the Georgian are still trying to infiltrate both countries as thieves in the night. It shows also that McCain actual has no clue on what he is talking about and therefore must be seen as a sad old man who's day's are gone and only has some cloud because he is an American.
However, the congressman stressed that, in turn, the U.S. must make every effort to Russia executed an agreement to reduce conventional weapons and joining the WTO, has fulfilled all its international obligations. " It is comical, the USA breaks all international rules attacks countries simple for the want of oil, murders as part of the rich murderous history and record holder of the largest genocide committed in the world, wants others to obey their wishes. The WTO has in reality no value for the countries who are part of it other then the profit for the USA whole controls the WTO on all points, fort Russian to be part of it is a Medvedev folly what will be used against them. President Sarkozy made an clear and to the point statement concerning South Ossetia and Abkhazia, according to him the territory North of Georgia, was ostensibly free from Russian troops. Sarkozy has made this statement at a news conference aired live on television channel "Russia 24". "Now Georgia is completely free, and the tanks were within 40 km from Tbilisi. President Medvedev has kept his word "- Sarkozy has announced.
Sarkozy's statement is very curious about the background of that part of the Russian occupation forces are in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. In fact EU already has accepted that South Ossetia and Abkhazia are in depended countries. Nicolas Sarkozy (still in words) recognizes the independence of these countries. The rest of the EU holds back as not to upset the Americans on who they are depending, they think. In reality they are far in front of the Americans if they wanted. America is slowly being reduced to a police controlled state in which the citizen have similar freedom as the Germans had in the NAZI period, now just as then the citizen do not realize it, till it is to late.
Georgia repeatedly accused Russia of non-compliance with the pact Medvedev-Sarkozy plan, starting from this particular criterion stating that "Russian tanks are still on Georgian territory." But as always the dictator of Georgia is lying, as not one tank of Russia not even the smallest part of militaire equipment of Russia is on Georgian soil, not that this makes any different, lies, it is something he always does. Is it true that in the higher echelons of the criminal world has a solution: remove Saakashvili to the presidency? And so they did. Corporate USA saw profit in the instalation of Saakasvili. Meanwhile, Saakashvili the Hitler look alike without the mustache, accused Russia that they tries to arrange a coup in Georgia, by funding the opposition. However,it is not how Russia work, we are sure that the president of Georgia knows that very well.
Moscow has the guts to provoke a revolution in Georgia, "Saakashvili said in an interview to Ukrainian TV channel" Inter ", commenting on the dispersal of opposition rally in Tbilisi on Wednesday night. What he was calling an dispersal was in fact one of the most violent aggressive methods of removing killing and injuring people not seen since the times of the Gestapo in occupied territory during WW2. Many people have disappeared, many are arrested just for the fact that they were walking the street, and the Western press stayed silence as it had not permission from the USA to write about it. It had nothing to do with Russia who is not a party in it. Lies however are the strength of Saakasvili en on those lies drives his dictatorship this plus the always trusted help from Israel and the USA.
That Saakasvili is mentally unstable and has problems with hallucination and the feeling of inferiority, is a well known fact. In any western country a person with such an personality would already be locked safely away in a mental institution. This is a group of people, he said, who are directly funded from Moscow and Moscow is guided by clearly fulfills the orders of the FSB ... They have been specially trained to provoke unrest. As clearly shows the man has an problem with reality, and facts, in short the man is ill,mentally disturbed and only in power because of the help and support the USA and Israel are given to them. Sad old people like McCain using the mental state of Saakavilli to implant all kind of idea that they know do not exist but which due to the mental incapability of Saakavilli are taken as real.
"Two days ago the EU published the results of his survey. Georgia is now the safest country in Europe. We have 4 times less crime than in Ukraine. Saakashvili said. The report does not say that with so many words and Georgia is certainly not the safest place in Europe, in fact Georgia does not belong in Europe, but beside that they have less crime recorded, as crime against citizen is not recorded if the victim is not an Saakasvili supporting citizen, it is also not recorded if the perpetrator is a Saakasvili supporter and the victim is not. Hence the result is a lower level of recorded crime, although the crime is actual considerable higher then in the Ukraine. The different is that Georgia is an dictator run country where freedom of word and press is a crime against the State.
The USA have asked Georgia to investigate the deaths and the disappearing of Saakasvili victims. Saakasvilli said it will be investigated. So many are arrested and investigated that for a long time there will be no new demonstrations, we will not allow it and with the thousands of people arrested an or never to be seen that could be right. If not we may presume that Israel and the USA will sent over special investigators to kill off what of the demonstrators there are still left.
The USA need Georgia as his base to attack Russia North Caucasus to enable the USA to get their hands on the Russian oil, they will not do it openly themselves but leave it to Georgian Mad Dictator to do it for them, with well trained soldiers trained by the Israeli and with the up to date latest weapons of the USA. It is therefore that the USA needs countries like Poland and the Ukraine, to create a second front if the Georgians do make the USA instructed move. They tried it once with the attack on south Ossetia to reach the tunnel to the Russian side of the mountains, it failed but they will try it again.
A mad dictator is the same as a wounded tiger, it fight even if it knows it will lose but fight in the hope that it will win. Saakasvili will not of course fight himself, he is to much of a coward to do this. His weapons are speeches and lies, arrests and torture, secret attacks and murder. However he should remember, never ever in the world did a mad dictator survive, ever!
=================================================================
30-05-2011
Science has yet to figure out how life before the ending of the Dinosaur was established. The many theories launched concerning this have all one thing in common they still do not know how it ended and why. The theory they have enough, many of them with details which are changing all the time. This would have been occurring in such a way that the earth’s orbit could have been altered, the earth could have been filled with dangerous volcanic gasses, which could have created dangerous alterations and climatologically changes. It could have created an alteration in the earth’s magnetic field and the chemical contents of air and earth. The list is endless.
The Pangaea would have created a solid and large enough land mass to complete change the climate of earth, the tectonic pressure would have been enormous. That tectonic pressure may have created massive volcanic activities and if so, it could have blocked out the sunlight for many years by the release of debris and ash in the air. This on it self could have triggered a chemical alteration of air and earth. Fact is that in that time earth had one of his longest and largest ice age period known. A supplying theory is that an enormous million cubic miles of lava spread out over what is now Siberia a 250 million years ago approx.
This combination on the Pangaea created almost the complete extinction of flora and fauna, and it was after this that the first Dinosaurs appeared on earth with a still unknown metabolism, or how they came into existence. The rise and fall of the Dinosaur is therefore one of the most puzzling problems for the scientist. Again there are many suggestions, many possibilities, but in reality at the moment if we leave out the suggestions and possible possibilities then we are still nowhere. As a result of so many theories and possibilities but without any solid evidence to progress it is no wonder that only a very view scientist are involved in the origin research of originality of natural evolution.
Science is progressing fast as a result of more available data and new equipment for data storage and calculations, to up date the search and the research. However it will remain to be seen of it will be possible to create the possible theoretical grounds for evaluation and proceeding to create the similar fields of creation as were on Pangaea and on which the Dinosaurs could live. It also remains to be seen of it will be possible to recreate the fields of creation at the time the Dinosaurs sudden ending, would that be possible we would have an considerable better insight about the start of the natural evolution. Although sciences still have to figure out how those life-forming chemicals were formed and destroyed. They cannot proceed unless they know what really altered the chemical situation of air and earth, if there was such an alteration. Both are fundamental to sustain life in whatever form.
Extreme heat, sudden cold, changes in the magnetic field the speeding or slowing of earth’s orbit can have an effect on natural evolution, which is a fact. Theory is however, is the fact that science does not know what the changes were.
So long as that scientific data is not available, or data that is available is open for speculation, no search or research to the situation on Pangaea the beginning or at the end of the Dinosaurs is possible. Again here the scientist have solved the problem by suggesting that the possible clue must be in the fact that......they do not know it yet. Does this means that we simple have to give up, forget about it. We should not nor is there any intention to do so the field is too interesting in details and possibilities.
Science have to work with less then desirable data, however that was always the case in science. We know that fanatics who have adopted a static view on how it all began disagree with science, although they know that science regarding the natural evolution only just have started. Although the search and research in earnest is already near two hundred years going, in the frame it is just the beginning. In fact, they are not even out of the starter’s blocks. However, those fanatic’s wants instant explanations and they want it now. They do not deliver an alternative themselves, they do not deliver proof about there own point of view, although some point to the bible as the only source what is correct. Those fanatic’s in disagreement are almost as fanatic in their pursue of the natural evolutionist of which they insist have to proof their point without delivering any themselves. They wants us to believe that what is in the bible is correct, is right is to the point and must be seen as a fact.
However, at the same time that they say, the bible is correct and right they reject the epic of Gilgamesh and the Enuma Elis, although both say the same and parts are even mentioned in the bible. They reject the Code of Ur-Nammu although parts of the Hebrew laws are based on it; they reject Shamash as God, because only the God of the Jews is right. However, Shamash was the original God of the Semitics, the Jews only changed his name. The Jews it self are a part of that Semitic tribe, and Shamash was the God in Ur, and Haran when the Jews were living there. There is no historical proof that in Ur or Haran the Jews had a different God as the others living in Ur or Haran. The God of the Jews is also the God of the Christians, therefore Christians are still believing in Shamash although they call them now God. The point is that those fanatics who believe in stories unproven want the evolutionist to proof his case, although knowing that this science is only just started. It makes the fact that the Christian Church special in the US is the biggest obstruction of science into natural evolution.
This behaviour is ad odds with the normal curiosity of human kind, you may expect that special the Christian Church would do all to proof the bible right. What can be more profitable then if science in natural evolution fails to find any reasonable evidence, not only know but also 100 or 200 years from now. Natural evolution scientist should be given time to come at least out of the starting blocks. They will be able to re-create via search and research the right circumstances in which he can create the right situation. Being the magnetic and chemical alteration of air and earth as was in the time of Pangaea and at the life time and the end of the dinosaurs.
This search will launch science in a higher orbit as a matter of speaking. They can let go of the restrictions to science as they have now and search new pathways never walked before. With those axioms removed all things are possible theoretical. The opponents will say scientist who not longer belief in the axioms of natural evolution are in fact creationist as they creating new possibilities and theories. It will be obvious that they are not they are scientist who progress were Christianity stands still fails and retract.
Some call intelligent design, a view based on an observation, without explaining the reason of how and why? They call it creation science. However, how can they call it a science as no research is involved by scientist? Intellectual design is simple the assertion that certain features of earth, universe and life is best explained by an intelligent cause. This a modern form of the traditional theological argument to prove God existence. It found its origin in the US by creationist to avoid Court rulings, in an attempt to try to promote the creation as a science, although it is in fact a pseudo science and does not have a science background. The more disrespectful call it a junk science.
It is an anti-evolution belief, also called origin science based on a singular unobserved events happened in a remote past of which there is no acceptable proof available.
There is a natural intelligent design theory which is indeed a not a science and which statements are not proven. It is normal if there is a claim, for science to investigate the evidence to examine the fact and to draw a conclusion, temporary or permanent. This is in intelligent design not possible therefore the predicate of science is void; there is no evidence to examine. Some say that intelligent design is not a religion as it does not require faith that however, is a cheap way out as intelligent design cannot be in existence without faith; it is the only backing this theory has.
Others say intelligent design is a framework of logical thinking based on observation; logical thinking however, dispels every thing that is not observational to science.
Intellectual design does not have a science based observational base. The base of natural intelligent, does not even attempts to find an reasonable claim for their point of view. What they do is simple criticising all the work what evolutionist are doing. If the Evolutionist makes an discovering then the Intelligent design believers are there to make sure that they find point on which they can criticise the discovering, rightly or wrongly. If they find that an discovering of the evolutionist has an fact in it that is open for discussion than that point is used to create many sheets of paper comments to disprove the evolutionist findings. They do not at any time offer an checkable alternative or any checkable proof.
Natural evolution or intelligent design is fully proven they say,the people who pretend they know and who making a rather nice living out of it at the same time. However, note that concerning intelligent design nothing is proven, there is only the belief and the faith. This based on the singular point that all is perfect therefore, there has to be an intelligent design and an intellectual designer, the problem here is that all is not perfect. Natural evolutionists can prove some and have a possibility of theories for others, but this is science and it is only just started and need in the coming generations an increased philosophical thinking and further development of scientific materials. The realisation is there that although not proven yet, in time with further development of scientific tools altered chemical structures to investigate the air and earth chemical structures 250 and 65 million of years ago together with a simulation of an altered earth orbit and magnetic field to prove the natural evolution. This time is still not there as equipment to simulate the altered orbit and magnetic field in combination with the alteration of air and earth chemical structure is not available yet, and have a further problem that the right air and earth chemical structure need to be found before such an project of simulation can be started.
The proof of the natural evolution or the failure to do so is still a long way off unless there are sudden scientific discoveries, which will make the speeding up possible. None of the scientific laws as defined to day are suitable for a research into the field of natural evolution. As so long the data needed is not available and not possible to create yet, to enable scientist to proof one way or another that their theory is possible.
What we expect now and what theoretical possibilities we can prove, is in the future to reveal.
It does mean that the dependence on axioms will be void. Relying on RNA will be void as that applies to science situations, as we know to day which can be abandoned in the future as other possibilities and theories are taking over. We only can present a full-scale evolution progress if we are able to produce a simulation process data as were available at the beginning of Pangaea and the ending of the dinosaurs.
Intelligent design, the creation is what it always was, History.
=================================================================
Other pages:
This is the text-only version of this page. Click here to see this page with graphics.
Edit this page |
Manage website
Make Your Own Website: 2-Minute-Website.com