Archana, you must know that 'revelations' HAVE to come from books, written long after the fact. why, how else are they gonna make money off the things the've seen and done?
'integrity' is a word that is fast becoming obsolete.
Since Tom's being erased in schoolbooks in Texas, maybe it's time he was made available to the Arabic-speaking world. It's particularly apt at this point in time and space.
as i understand, mainstream media--which introduced him to the world last fall--actually had nothing to do with broadcasting the incident when it occurred.
Jones 'trial' of the Koran took place on March 20th, and was broadcast via the internet from his church's (cult's) website at http://doveworld.org , according to Talk2Action:
this is how word of it spread from Florida to Afghanistan.
the actual burning has been posted to YouTube; however, it appeared that someone had taken down Jones' internet site. it's my own hope that it was done by 4chan or Anonymous, since the US government didn't have the foresight or sense to do so.
as of this moment, Jones' site is up again; however, i don't know if videos of the 'trial' are still there.
(all those who wish a holy war between Christianity and Islam have an excuse due to his actions, which were broadcast by him over the internet)
(2) endangered the lives of American troops, Americans and their allies
(the deaths at the UN station are a direct consequence of his actions, as the assault the next day on a US base by suicide bombers. . .he has no right to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater)
Terry Jones fits the bill. He should be tried for treason, detained at either a superprison or Guantanamo. He must learn there are consequences for the choices he makes, as there are for all of us.
“It was intended to stir the pot; if you don’t shake the boat, everyone will stay in their complacency,” Mr. Jones said in an interview at his office in the Dove World Outreach Center.
unlike Julian Assange, we now have proof that Terry Jones has endangered the lives of our troops and our allies. He should be sent to Guantanamo forthwith; barring that, to Afghanistan.
i may not like him as a dictator, but i can agree with his assessments. he has a better grip of the MidEast than Bushco ever had.
i've said for years that Bush was the mouthpiece for Cheney and Rumsfield. since they've all left, i've seen hints in papers, etc from the Strategic Studies Institute (and elsewhere) that this was so.
The Book of Revelation flatly contradicts Shimkus and his Genesis account; it's full of fire and the destruction of the world. Why should God destroy the world by flood, promise he won't do it again 'for man's sake', and then in Revelation proceed to do just that?
Revelation 21:1 "Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. Also there was no more sea." (NKJV)
who' hoppen? they die in an accident? old age? with all the action in the preceding chapters, brought about by God's angels, it sure looks like God is gonna destroy the world again, this time with fire.
and if it's not "for man's sake", one can only conclude God is a sadist (and therefore not worth worshipping), or John had one heckuva trip on some mushrooms in the area.
Shimkus needs to go back to school. he needs to learn the difference between 'faith' and knowledge. wouldn't hurt him to read the whole Bible himself, without mouthpieces giving their preferred passages and interpretations.
and he also needs to realize that it's the little things that are often the most important.
in a world of instantaneous planet-wide communications, when media is broadcast 24 hours a day and virtually anyone can have a cell phone or computer, media can be created and people can be influenced, by parties on either side of the fence.
terrorism and insurgency depend upon projecting the perception that their view is correct and justified. being of limited resources, they cannot fight a nation-state as in a 'traditional' war. among their tools is the ability to sway massive groups of people, by violence or propaganda.
however, while focusing on the 'bad guys', those procedures and methods can just as easily be used by the other side.
the following pamphlet may be illuminating in this regard:
"YouTube War: Fighting in a World of Cameras in Every Cell Phone and Photoshop on Every Computer", Authored by Dr. Cori E. Dauber.
it may soon go into open warfare. climate change is already making itself felt; Pakistan and India have come close to blows in recent years over the fresh water supply gained from Himalayan glaciers.
as long as it continues, actual conflict is a distinct probability. there are too many people in poverty already; loss of environment, crops and drinking water may possibly bring about conflict between north and south.
the United States Government, in my opinion, is acting criminally by its continued use of fossil fuels and materials producing carbon dioxide; and i don't believe it'll stop till there's nothing left, or we're forced out of it.
here are two publications which might shed some light on possible conflicts brought about by climate change:
"Affairs of State: The Interagency and National Security", edited by Dr. Gabriel Marcella
whenever i think of Iran's government, i can't help thinking of American city governnment.
in my hometown, we're ran by a Mayor & a City Council, with a City Manager serving under them. the City Manager serves as a go-between or point man, or a bottleneck, between upper city government and the people of the city. he serves at the pleasure of the City Council, more or less.
as i recollect, the true leaders of Iran are a group ran by a 'Supreme Leader', who more or less speaks for them and has the final say. they'd correspond to the Mayor and the City Council.
Ahmadinejad, on the other hand, is the City Manager. he carries out their policies and takes the flak, and becomes the mouthpiece of the Council. he gets the press, good or bad.
in the meantime, the Council--the real power--sits back, aloof, monitoring what's going on and using their lightning rod to study the responses to their policies and decisions.
dsmith, you're absolutely right that Princess Sarah would bomb Iran--in a second--but she's not bought and paid for by Israelis or Jewish interests, although Israel IS central to her wordlview.
she a fundamentalist theocrat, as are some other politicians and many other people. They need to protect, support and defend Israel because it's a key to the Second Coming of Christ.
for all the Armageddon believers, if Israel were to fall apart it would expose the emptiness and shallowness of their hatred for this world and their desire to bring about the next, even at the possible cost of nuclear war.
of course, after Israel defeats all those Godless atheists and agents of Satan at Armageddon, Jesus will magically appear and take them all to Heaven, as well as the few chosen Jewish people who've been set aside by God.
of course, this comes as quite a surprise, as well as an annoyance, to Israelis who take a dim view of becoming Christians in accordance to Christian Scripture.
there are groups of Christian extremists--not necessarily violent--who continually pour money and resources and support into Israel because Israel's the key to the Rapture and the Second Coming of Jesus. That's their main, and often only, reason for supporting Israel. Completely separate case from being controlled by Israeli or Jewish economic forces.
And it's evident from past comments over the years that Sarah falls into this mindset.
in psychological terms, it's pure nihilism in that they're totally willing to bring about the destruction of this world, which they hate for not conforming to their standards.
they do this with the self-assurance that (1) Jesus will take them home and (2) THEY are the Chosen Ones.
While I reserve judgment, I'm coming more and more to agree with Petraeus that Shaxad's a lone wolf homegrown. It was a clumsy and inept attempt; and I believe if he were connected to the Taliban, there would have been at least some support personnel that would have been with him in New York.
Fertilizer bombs doesn't sound like their style, and insurgent/terrorist groups in Afghanistan and Iraq are indeed more skilled with explosives than that. We've had at least eight years of experience with it, and I don't see themm trying an untested method in the enemy heartland.
Hillary oughtta watch herself and her words. As I remember, the Pakistani people were already against us when this so-called 'War On Terror' was launched. Musharraf had to keep them on a leash while keeping an eye on the INI and dealing with us. . .all simultaneously.
We really had no reason to be there once it was found that there were less than 100 Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. It's our presence, it seems, that perpetuates the conflict, just as it was in Iraq.
And I don't care for the repeated incursions into Pakistani territory. Most of all, I do not care for the slaughter of innocents and noncombatants that continues under our direction. As Britney would have put it: "Oops, I did it again. . ."
Virtually no one understands their culture, any more than the Afghans, in my opinion. Their way is not our way. We're like a spoilt child demanding what we want now; and that isn't always practical.
Obama does have a lot of problems here in the US, even dangerous ones, but I don't believe they're anything compared to the problems Karzai and Zardari have.
If we keep pushing, eventually they will get tired of it. Then we'll really be in for it. Our government had best learn some restraint, or we'll lose our allies there, and more besides.
JJ, you forget that our media services--especially TV--tend to report what the government wants us to hear, as it's nearly always been. They'd rather we heard about celebrities or entertainment than the issues of the day; and frankly, a lot of people here truly could care less unless it was their kid whose life was in danger over there. They raise a big hairy fuss here if someone only mentions danger, but say nothing about the people killed outside the US. And for every American that may be killed, there may be hundreds or thousands killed in other countries.
It's been that way for most of our history. The history exists, but it's mainly kept out of the mainstream--and educational systems--itself.
I've found the best way to counter this somatizing, blind, 'Brave New World' influence is the internet; specifically, not only in reading alterative newspapers in English, but reading press from every continent and in as many ways as I can. I find that I not only get more information, but a far fuller version of the turth, especially if the press of several countries (not necessarily allied) agree with each other.
Archana, you must know that 'revelations' HAVE to come from books, written long after the fact. why, how else are they gonna make money off the things the've seen and done?
'integrity' is a word that is fast becoming obsolete.
Since Tom's being erased in schoolbooks in Texas, maybe it's time he was made available to the Arabic-speaking world. It's particularly apt at this point in time and space.
as i understand, mainstream media--which introduced him to the world last fall--actually had nothing to do with broadcasting the incident when it occurred.
Jones 'trial' of the Koran took place on March 20th, and was broadcast via the internet from his church's (cult's) website at http://doveworld.org , according to Talk2Action:
"The Book Burning and The Massacre"
http://www.talk2action.org/story/2011/4/2/16759/92116
this is how word of it spread from Florida to Afghanistan.
the actual burning has been posted to YouTube; however, it appeared that someone had taken down Jones' internet site. it's my own hope that it was done by 4chan or Anonymous, since the US government didn't have the foresight or sense to do so.
as of this moment, Jones' site is up again; however, i don't know if videos of the 'trial' are still there.
Terry Jones has
(1) given aid and comfort to the enemy
(all those who wish a holy war between Christianity and Islam have an excuse due to his actions, which were broadcast by him over the internet)
(2) endangered the lives of American troops, Americans and their allies
(the deaths at the UN station are a direct consequence of his actions, as the assault the next day on a US base by suicide bombers. . .he has no right to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater)
Terry Jones fits the bill. He should be tried for treason, detained at either a superprison or Guantanamo. He must learn there are consequences for the choices he makes, as there are for all of us.
“It was intended to stir the pot; if you don’t shake the boat, everyone will stay in their complacency,” Mr. Jones said in an interview at his office in the Dove World Outreach Center.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/03/us/03burn.html?_r=2
he was warned. and warned. including by the Secretary of Defense. but he did it anyway.
according to NPR, the Kandahar attack included a team of four suicide bombers attempting to attack 'a large US military installation'.
http://www.npr.org/2011/04/02/135063155/violence-in-afghanistan-after-quran-burned-in-u-s&sc=nl&cc=nh-20110402
unlike Julian Assange, we now have proof that Terry Jones has endangered the lives of our troops and our allies. He should be sent to Guantanamo forthwith; barring that, to Afghanistan.
there's a lot about Egypt i might not like, but i can be proud of this.
too bad so many of the 'Christians' in this country hate and vilify our own Muslims.
fortunately, there are also Christians who support and defend American Muslims.
sounds like a realist. no sugarcoating.
i may not like him as a dictator, but i can agree with his assessments. he has a better grip of the MidEast than Bushco ever had.
i've said for years that Bush was the mouthpiece for Cheney and Rumsfield. since they've all left, i've seen hints in papers, etc from the Strategic Studies Institute (and elsewhere) that this was so.
Juan, excuse me. . .i have to throw up now. . .
The Book of Revelation flatly contradicts Shimkus and his Genesis account; it's full of fire and the destruction of the world. Why should God destroy the world by flood, promise he won't do it again 'for man's sake', and then in Revelation proceed to do just that?
Revelation 21:1 "Now I saw a new heaven and a new earth, for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away. Also there was no more sea." (NKJV)
who' hoppen? they die in an accident? old age? with all the action in the preceding chapters, brought about by God's angels, it sure looks like God is gonna destroy the world again, this time with fire.
and if it's not "for man's sake", one can only conclude God is a sadist (and therefore not worth worshipping), or John had one heckuva trip on some mushrooms in the area.
Shimkus needs to go back to school. he needs to learn the difference between 'faith' and knowledge. wouldn't hurt him to read the whole Bible himself, without mouthpieces giving their preferred passages and interpretations.
and he also needs to realize that it's the little things that are often the most important.
in a world of instantaneous planet-wide communications, when media is broadcast 24 hours a day and virtually anyone can have a cell phone or computer, media can be created and people can be influenced, by parties on either side of the fence.
terrorism and insurgency depend upon projecting the perception that their view is correct and justified. being of limited resources, they cannot fight a nation-state as in a 'traditional' war. among their tools is the ability to sway massive groups of people, by violence or propaganda.
however, while focusing on the 'bad guys', those procedures and methods can just as easily be used by the other side.
the following pamphlet may be illuminating in this regard:
"YouTube War: Fighting in a World of Cameras in Every Cell Phone and Photoshop on Every Computer", Authored by Dr. Cori E. Dauber.
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?pubID=951
. . .it's available as a PDF document download file.
it may soon go into open warfare. climate change is already making itself felt; Pakistan and India have come close to blows in recent years over the fresh water supply gained from Himalayan glaciers.
as long as it continues, actual conflict is a distinct probability. there are too many people in poverty already; loss of environment, crops and drinking water may possibly bring about conflict between north and south.
the United States Government, in my opinion, is acting criminally by its continued use of fossil fuels and materials producing carbon dioxide; and i don't believe it'll stop till there's nothing left, or we're forced out of it.
here are two publications which might shed some light on possible conflicts brought about by climate change:
"Affairs of State: The Interagency and National Security", edited by Dr. Gabriel Marcella
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?PubID=896
and
"From the New Middle Ages to a New Dark Age: The Decline of the State and U.S. Strategy", authored by Dr. Phil Williams.
http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?PubID=867
how far we have fallen. . .
whenever i think of Iran's government, i can't help thinking of American city governnment.
in my hometown, we're ran by a Mayor & a City Council, with a City Manager serving under them. the City Manager serves as a go-between or point man, or a bottleneck, between upper city government and the people of the city. he serves at the pleasure of the City Council, more or less.
as i recollect, the true leaders of Iran are a group ran by a 'Supreme Leader', who more or less speaks for them and has the final say. they'd correspond to the Mayor and the City Council.
Ahmadinejad, on the other hand, is the City Manager. he carries out their policies and takes the flak, and becomes the mouthpiece of the Council. he gets the press, good or bad.
in the meantime, the Council--the real power--sits back, aloof, monitoring what's going on and using their lightning rod to study the responses to their policies and decisions.
PS: tanx agin, Juan. Domo.
- Randy
dsmith, you're absolutely right that Princess Sarah would bomb Iran--in a second--but she's not bought and paid for by Israelis or Jewish interests, although Israel IS central to her wordlview.
she a fundamentalist theocrat, as are some other politicians and many other people. They need to protect, support and defend Israel because it's a key to the Second Coming of Christ.
for all the Armageddon believers, if Israel were to fall apart it would expose the emptiness and shallowness of their hatred for this world and their desire to bring about the next, even at the possible cost of nuclear war.
of course, after Israel defeats all those Godless atheists and agents of Satan at Armageddon, Jesus will magically appear and take them all to Heaven, as well as the few chosen Jewish people who've been set aside by God.
of course, this comes as quite a surprise, as well as an annoyance, to Israelis who take a dim view of becoming Christians in accordance to Christian Scripture.
there are groups of Christian extremists--not necessarily violent--who continually pour money and resources and support into Israel because Israel's the key to the Rapture and the Second Coming of Jesus. That's their main, and often only, reason for supporting Israel. Completely separate case from being controlled by Israeli or Jewish economic forces.
And it's evident from past comments over the years that Sarah falls into this mindset.
in psychological terms, it's pure nihilism in that they're totally willing to bring about the destruction of this world, which they hate for not conforming to their standards.
they do this with the self-assurance that (1) Jesus will take them home and (2) THEY are the Chosen Ones.
While I reserve judgment, I'm coming more and more to agree with Petraeus that Shaxad's a lone wolf homegrown. It was a clumsy and inept attempt; and I believe if he were connected to the Taliban, there would have been at least some support personnel that would have been with him in New York.
Fertilizer bombs doesn't sound like their style, and insurgent/terrorist groups in Afghanistan and Iraq are indeed more skilled with explosives than that. We've had at least eight years of experience with it, and I don't see themm trying an untested method in the enemy heartland.
Hillary oughtta watch herself and her words. As I remember, the Pakistani people were already against us when this so-called 'War On Terror' was launched. Musharraf had to keep them on a leash while keeping an eye on the INI and dealing with us. . .all simultaneously.
We really had no reason to be there once it was found that there were less than 100 Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. It's our presence, it seems, that perpetuates the conflict, just as it was in Iraq.
And I don't care for the repeated incursions into Pakistani territory. Most of all, I do not care for the slaughter of innocents and noncombatants that continues under our direction. As Britney would have put it: "Oops, I did it again. . ."
Virtually no one understands their culture, any more than the Afghans, in my opinion. Their way is not our way. We're like a spoilt child demanding what we want now; and that isn't always practical.
Obama does have a lot of problems here in the US, even dangerous ones, but I don't believe they're anything compared to the problems Karzai and Zardari have.
If we keep pushing, eventually they will get tired of it. Then we'll really be in for it. Our government had best learn some restraint, or we'll lose our allies there, and more besides.
JJ, you forget that our media services--especially TV--tend to report what the government wants us to hear, as it's nearly always been. They'd rather we heard about celebrities or entertainment than the issues of the day; and frankly, a lot of people here truly could care less unless it was their kid whose life was in danger over there. They raise a big hairy fuss here if someone only mentions danger, but say nothing about the people killed outside the US. And for every American that may be killed, there may be hundreds or thousands killed in other countries.
It's been that way for most of our history. The history exists, but it's mainly kept out of the mainstream--and educational systems--itself.
I've found the best way to counter this somatizing, blind, 'Brave New World' influence is the internet; specifically, not only in reading alterative newspapers in English, but reading press from every continent and in as many ways as I can. I find that I not only get more information, but a far fuller version of the turth, especially if the press of several countries (not necessarily allied) agree with each other.