Tuesday, April 30, 2013
Friday, April 26, 2013
In the 6th century, their were no modern governments, nor any real standing armies. (Except maybe the Roman army) At that time, armies were generated on an as needed basis. Religion was frequently a uniting factor. Islam is the only entity that I know of this is still fielding an army in this fashion. Throughout history, tactics of guerrilla warfare are the mark of an inferior fighting force. Terrorism is the natural product of such a backward combination of a religious and nationalist entity. This method of generating an armed force even acts like the age from which it began: 7th century it. Be-headings, cutting off the hands, gouging out eyes, whipping and stoning are classic punishment from that same time period. This 'army' does not recognize any modern government nor any of the modern rules of warfare.
Tuesday, April 23, 2013
I am not a particularly religious man. However, I did attend 8 years of Catholic grade school. The teachers and nuns who taught me were dedicated individuals who lived what they preached. And the Bible does NOT teach violence. Quite the contrary.
I am certain that devout Muslims are no less dedicated individuals than those who taught me. The problem is that the Korans teachings are so different from the Bible. As I pointed out in my series of posts on how Islam causes war and violence, the Koran is not just about religion. The Koran describes a system of governance and laws. And severe penalties abound within it's pages.
Kill the occupiers of Muslim lands. The penalty for leaving Islam is death. Stoning to death. (The stones can't be so small as to qualify as a pebble and can't be so large as to cause death with one blow) Kill the infidel. Lots of death penalties. Chopping off hands and feet, gouging out eyes, lashes with a whip for various infractions. Heck, there is even a big debate about being about to beat your wife. (You are not supposed to leave visible marks.)
No wonder they want to cover up their women. It is not just to keep them modest and under control.
I know the Bible pretty well after 8 years of study. I don't know of ANY teachings that are remotely similar. In fact, quite the opposite. (I will spare you the details)
The Koran was spoken by a 'prophet' who could read and write after being in a cave for 30 days. Others wrote it down. These writings were such a mess that it was decided to organize it by the size of the phrase spoken, not by content or concept or subject matter. (Well written books are just not organized in this way.) It is true that a percentage of these teachings are generous and accepting of others. However, if you look at the time when these phrases were spoken, it is generally accepted that the majority of these 'peaceful' phrases were spoken early in the prophet's career. One of the later phrases has the command that when in conflict, the LATER phrases are to supersede the early phrases. The later phrases are those spoken when Islam was dominate in the land and Islamic law enforced.
If you look through history and around the world, you can find plenty of examples of where the Bible was twisted and used to excess. You can also find plenty of cases of Christians who were 'bad' and did evil acts. But you simply cannot compare this with the evil acts we have been and are seeing performed by the followers of the Koran.
Repeated suicide bombings throughout the Muslim world. Constant violence and warfare in all of the places where Islam is in contact with the rest of the world. Armed militias being formed by Imams and other devote followers of Islamic teachings. And their behavior! Straight out of the the 7th century. Be-headings, burning of churches, indiscriminate killings and bombings. Public stoning and whipping. There is just no parallel anywhere in the rest of the world where this is anywhere near so commonplace and supported. The source cannot be anything else than the Koran and Islamic teachings. It certainly is NOT a positive aspect of human nature.
Friday, April 19, 2013
Part III (Final)
It has been a long time since the last major, world war. History has demonstrated that major wars occur every so often. On top of this, it is only a matter of time before one of these terror groups obtains and deploys an effective WMD. Control of the war can easily be lost at that point. It will become difficult, if not impossible to prevent the war from escalating. After all, escalation is generally how wars are won. Time is NOT on our side and the U.S. government is playing for time. Wrong strategy. We are in big trouble if our President doesn't figure it out fast enough. The sovereign ‘Nation of Islam’ IS the cause of much of the warfare that is involving the Muslim world today. In order to stop this, we need to challenge Islamic sovereignty.
The bad news is that this will trigger a war just as surely as ‘occupation’ of any Muslim land. In fact, “occupation” is an excellent way to mount this challenge to Islamic sovereignty. This was one of the main reasons why I was interested in ‘invading’ Iraq. It forced our enemies into attacking our military in the desert, an ideal environment for mechanized warfare. Our forces excel at this type of warfare. To use President Lincoln’s words (With a different intent), before this war is over, the army of Islam (Islamic sovereignty) ‘must perish from this earth’. It truly is them or us. I choose US. (United States) Naturally. Nationalism is another good reason for open conflict. Islamic nationalism has to disappear just as Catholic nationalism died after the crusades more than 400 years ago. Otherwise, the war Islamic nationalism is waging against us will go on. Like it has for the past 1400 years. And sooner or later, nukes are going to enter the picture.
Tuesday, April 16, 2013
*Note: Not enough information to make comments on the bombing in Boston yesterday. What concerns me there is the fact that President Obama misled us so badly concerning the attack on Benghazi.
Just look at how well the governments that are host to Islamic organizations like HAMAS and Hezbollah relate with those very same groups. They may be in agreement on a number of important issues, but the government is supposed to be accountable for the actions of it’s own people within its borders. These Islamic nationalist groups are NOT accountable and this creates a very serious conflict of interest. Nationalist issues of this type have caused wars and will cause wars in order to obtain a resolution. The issue of separation of church and state has in the past and will in the future, trigger wars for this very reason.
Religions cannot be allowed to muster armies today like they could in the 7th century. Only national governments should be able to raise and deploy armies. The fact that Islam is doing so today (as if we are still in the 7th century) creates national sovereignty issues that historically have taken wars to resolve. On top of this, Islam in general has a very low threshold for waging war.
The Koran allows for the waging of war far more easily than ANY modern government would consider. The nation-states of today are far more powerful and numerous. As a result, warfare is far more destructive today. This makes war much more dangerous and more of a threat to each governmental body than when Islam was born, when governments as we know them today did not exist at all. Kingdoms rose and fell at a far more rapid pace than governments today. Frequently within a persons relatively short lifetime. This does not happen nearly as often today. The national governments of today are far stronger and more resistant than the kingdoms of the ancient past. Hence the movement of Islamic nationalists toward irregular warfare. Yet the nationalist nature of Islam has remained.
Notice how Zionism is a term commonly used by leaders in the Muslim world to describe the political nature of the ‘Nation of Israel’? The ‘Nation of Islam’ can easily identify with this concept because this is precisely what ‘political’ Islam is. One key difference is that the nation of Israel is a modern national government whereas the nation of Islam is not. I have studied wars for more than 40 years. I have never studied one where so many GOOD reasons exist for violent conflict in order to resolve.
Most wars really only require one or two good reasons. The U.S. Civil War was about slavery and loyalty to state over Federal government. World War II was basically about national governments just invading and taking over other national governments. In the case of Islam, I have identified 8 reasons. No wonder Islam, violence and warfare go together so much.
Until one side or the other implements some very large changes, this war can only be just beginning. I am fearful of what can possibly occur after a severe economic downturn. The actual conflict is much, much larger than what is being fought in these various conflicts where the Islamic terrorist groups (The Islamic army) are active. The U.S. is only directly involved in a few of them. A major downturn in the world economy could easily be the match that starts a major conflict.
Friday, April 12, 2013
I don't want to EVER break the law. I rarely speed over 5 over the limit. I certainly want to obey the law concerning firearms. I have a FOID card, (which is required in Illinois) just so I can practice. I don't and never have owned so much as a BB gun. I did own a slingshot while a child, but that is it. I still want to not only have the right to own a firearm, I want the the right of access to them both for purchase and use. Ammunition has the same requirements. Firearms are not much good without bullets.
The regulations that are being passed today is going to make it very difficult for people to stay within the law and still be able to exercise their 2nd amendment rights in any practical way. I have been able to do so with some degree of trouble, but this is going to CHANGE.
After all, President Obama said that he was going to “Fundamentally CHANGE” America. He is doing just that. He never said that we would like it. Nor did he say that we would agree with it. President Obama may not be able to repeal the 2nd amendment, but he would like to. Although he does not have the political ability to outright repeal, he can place so many restrictions that effectively takes away your ability to exercise the right that is supposedly guaranteed. A good way to do that is to go after the ammunition. No amendment protects the right to ammunition. And I must admit, if successful, this would be real, “Fundamental” CHANGE.
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
Most of the peaceful phrases in the Koran were spoken in the early stages of the formation of Islam. The Koran specifically states that in cases where the ‘laws’ are contradicting, the later rules are to be followed. (The Koran is NOT organized by when the phrases were spoken, but by the length of the phrase) The phrases that were spoken in the later times are the ones that mainly concern governance and foreign policy. After all, this is when Islam held the power of government. This is also where the war against the U.S. Begins.
As far as the ‘Nation of Islam’ was concerned, the United States was just another infidel country. A big change occurred during the mid-20th century with the U.S. support of Israel. Even then, the United States was only indirectly involved. In 1982 and 1983 when the U.S. troops were in Lebanon, we were violating Muslim land directly with our ground forces and had to be thrown out. We became 'occupiers' of Muslim land. From Islam’s point of view, the U.S. was successfully thrown out. Then in 1991, Iraq invades the national sovereignty of Kuwait. When U.S. troops moved into Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries in order to kick Iraq out of Kuwait, we became ‘occupiers’ again. Even if the national government invited us in. Islam does not recognize the authority of the modern national government.
Ever since then, Islam has been at war directly against us because we continue to be ‘occupiers’. The Islamic terrorist groups are the ‘army’ of Islam. These are not ‘extremists’ as much as they are followers of the Islamic system of governance that overrides any and all national governments. Bin Laden is an excellent example. He believes (as do many others) that the sovereignty of Islam is being challenged. Historically, sovereignty issues have started plenty of wars. Defending your country and it's territory tests the loyalty of the population.
Most Muslims worldwide are ‘good’ people. They do not want war. However, they will fight for their way of life. Like the ‘good’ southerners in 1862 who fought for the Confederacy. The ‘good’ Germans and Japanese in 1944 fought for their countries as much as anything else. Many Muslims are already fighting against a foreign influence that is in conflict with Islamic governance and ideology.
Naturally, Islamic reaction is hostile to infringement upon what is considered to be it's sovereignty. Hostility does not necessarily lead to war, but the tendency is toward violence simply because the human frustrations that Islam imposes upon its followers requires an outlet. Anger is one of the few emotions that appear at least to an outsider, to be acceptable. Anger easily leads to violence. In addition, violence is more common at least in part because Islam has a relatively low threshold for waging war. War tends to make people chose. Most will naturally chose the side that they live with and understand. (Even if evil, like slavery or the Nazi government.) We can expect that many Muslims if not most, to side with Islam in any open conflict. Human nature demands this. This helps explain why so many others believe that we are creating new enemies by our actions ‘over there’. You may not agree with many of the reasons that I have listed as to why ‘political’ Islam causes wars. Many contain overlapping features. Yet even if you disagree on a number of these issues, this is enough to explain why peace has been so elusive in the Middle East and with Israel in particular. Too many issues within Islam are of a nationalist nature to NOT cause organized violence. It is noticeable how Islam and the modern national government do not get along.
Continued with next post. (Part 2 of 3)
Thursday, April 4, 2013
I read an article recently describing the reasons why President Obama is so supportive of Israel. This should dispel any concerns about our current President's backing of Israel. President Obama made the trip to Israel the first priority of his second term. He even spoke Hebrew! My reply is B.S.
I am an natural born American. I am loyal to our economic system, capitalism. This is what made America great. I also knew while growing up, that I could be drafted into the military. I missed Vietnam
by a few years, but I knew that if I was drafted, I would go. I would literally risk life and limb. And I would not even necessarily agree with the Commander-in-Chief about being there in the first place, but I would still go. America comes first. Before myself. Even at the risk of my children growing up without their father. All of this is in stark contrast to our current President.
President Obama showed his true loyalty during the Benghazi 'incident'. The official excuse was a video when it was well known at the time that it had been a coordinated attack. This attack was deliberately planned against the sovereignty of the United States. It resulted in the brutal murder of the Ambassador. The enemy even raised their black flag over two of our embassies, a dramatic symbol of national victory over another sovereign national entity. And our President deliberately misled us. Why?
Several days before the attack, the President had spoken at the Democratic National Convention about how that very same enemy had been 'decimated' and implied that they were no longer an effective enemy of our country. Politically it would look really bad if that same enemy shows how effective they really are. So for political advantage, he and numerous others attempted to mislead us. All they had to do was stall for a couple of months, until after the election. Then it would be old news.
And this guy will be loyal to Israel? He is not even loyal to his own country, why the hell would anyone believe that he would be loyal to ANY country?
What has happened to the party that gave us this famous quote?: “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what can you do for your country.”
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
I add racism because of its hatred. Islam codifies racism and hatred into its legal system. Although racism and hatred are not necessarily political, it would be human nature for hatred and racism to develop given the open discrimination over many generations. Indeed, over many centuries. The all out war against ALL political entities (Jews and Christians being singled out) would over time build on human weakness. You need something to build into hate to justify targeting people. You need to dehumanize the targeted (Like in war dehumanize the enemy) population in order to justify the taking of life and property. (People will go to great lengths: For example, pilots think of the aircraft that they shoot down as not having anyone inside. It is just a machine) The targeted population needs to be different and hateful toward you in order to generate the return hatred that they so clearly deserve. Racism fills that need exceptionally well. Islam excels at it as is seen throughout the Islamic world with such common expressions of hate speech and acts of violence against hated groups. (Once again, Jews and Christians are among the most common examples.)
If this is not worth waging war both for and against, then don't count it. I believe differently enough to add this to become number 9 in my list as to why Islam causes violence and warfare.