Thursday 19 July 2012

What is terrorism?

This is a touchy subject for most, where to start specifically in this case is to define the term so there is no future confusion! Google define's "Terrorism" as "The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims." I feel like that's a fair definition, you would agree? Okay, good, because that is the most widely expected definition and therefore is what we will be using!

Would it also be fair to state that terrorism is a game the United States is playing with Russia over the Middle East? I would think so, which makes sense as I'm the one stating it. [lol?] Yes, maybe not right now? Well, let me explain.

Once upon a time there was the Middle East, and there was this place we call the western world, and then of course there was Russia. It all started back in 1989 when the western world, more specifically the United States, discovered that Russia had gone ahead with it's interests with the many resources available in the area that we know as the Middle East. Their response was obviously that if Russia was going to take a piece of the cake, the United States needed to dig in as well before Russia took the majority for themselves. The result of this is the CIA going into Afghanistan and recruiting new members for the purpose of training them in guerilla warfare so that they would be able to protect themselves in the case of a soviet invasion. The CIA probably didn't think the following would happen so soon, but the new recruits either decided to drop the whole plan and do their own thing with their newly acquired skills, weapons and money, or the United States needed something to use and framed them. Regardless, the CIA trained a group of people in Afghanistan and that group completely backfired on them which then separated into what we know now as the Taliban and al-Qaeda.

This is where it gets fun, well, for the rest of the world watching at least. The United States, in an effort to keep this situation contained, then went to the UN and basically got permission to form a peace keeping mission going into the Middle East to contain this group that they have initially created. This peace keeping mission was more so a war over anything, however it was barely publicized as a way as they still needed something to justify their reasons for being there in that manner, and so came the media with their propaganda. Terrorism was one of the terms the government started repeating and drilling into our heads, the media then obviously echoed it. Now that we've made up this image of terrorism, we needed the physical acts to justify it. Now, I'm not saying at all that the Middle East was all peace and happiness, there was some interesting things going on in the area. However, the majority of the people killed who the military claimed to be terrorists were just civilians fighting the United States invading their country. Who, in this case, are acting like terrorists?

[EDIT: Paragraph added 23/07/12, Credit to "awesomeo" in comments section!]
What we need to understand here is exactly why the United States as well as Russia both wanted control over the Middle East, for one it's in the middle of a few different areas such as Europe being to it's left, China to it's right and Russia being up top. Another reason why it's a very valuable piece of land is because of the natural resources which just so happen to translate into a lot of money. The US had previously implemented a dictatorship in Iran, giving them control over the country, but since Russia funded a revolution against him, well... Iran was now a wild card! Seeing as the US was desperate to get it's spot back, Russia, at this point, has began to create ties with Iran. Just as your crazy ex-girlfriend would do anything to have you back, the US came up with some interesting plots of their own. There were a few "terrorist" related events in the Unites States, but September 11th, or 9/11, was the biggest and most well known.

The issue with 9/11 was that there is so much more evidence to show that it, at the very least, was NOT what the government stated it was. Apparently two planes were high jacked by a number of men with box cutters and then flown into the twin towers, the jet fuel from the planes then leaked down the elevator shafts and each floor seemed to collapse on top of each other from top to bottom going straight down. Think about this, does that even make sense? How would jet fuel simultaneously make it's way to each elevator shaft in order to have this collapse of each floor then making it's way straight to the ground... Not that jet fuel would even be able to cut the four main beams of the building, if this building fell, it should have slanted to one side or something other than going perfectly straight down identical to a planned demolition, furthermore you would have seen four big beams sticking up in the air before later [maybe] falling after the floors were out of the way. These buildings were made to be indestructible, they were actually built to take planes flying into them, that just so happened to be one of the precautions they looked into when initially designing it. When closely examined later, the beams appeared to be cut at a slant, also, there was molten liquid metal at the base of the scene for up to six weeks after September 11th. What's even weirder is that the fighter jets that were supposed to be at the scene within seconds to minutes of any aircraft getting too close to the twin towers of all things, weren't even responding to the scene. The government stated that they had no way of anticipating air craft flying into the twin towers, yet that's exactly what they've been practicing and even were practicing during the time of the collision. The fighter pilots were confused because no one could make it clear whether it was a test or the real deal, unfortunately the radar maps were being scrambled at the same time due to the tests. The government also apparently found a passport in absolute perfect condition on the ground level of the twin towers after the event, rescue workers at the scene couldn't even find a whole piece of a telephone. What this means is that the four main beams were completely melted, everything was pretty much pulverized, but a passport of a supposed terrorist apparently survived and lay upon the rubble. Not to mention that this suspect was later to have been proven to have absolutely no connection to 9/11 or any of the members who were supposedly involved, and was no where near the scene at the time of the incident.

The United Stated now has a reason to go to full out war, aside from the UN and their so called peace keeping mission, with the Middle East on the fight against Terrorism. Any country allied with the United Stated then began to slowly remove it's countries freedoms, most argue this is to distract it's citizens from what's really going on. Is it not that obvious? We've never not-been at war, war makes money - you can spend a ton of money to go to war, but at the same time your economy is at it's peak with all of the industries focussing on military equipment, also that we can send a bunch of our own corporations in to rebuild the country which then again boosts our economy. Money isn't made by saving it, it's made by spending it, profit and debt are the same thing. The more you make, the more you'll spend because you know you'll be making more in return but because of this the more debt you have and therefore the more you'll then spend so that you'll make even more and so on. The trick is that you can't pay off debt, you have to keep making and spending. Debt comes from the initial interest applied on loans that the country buys from banks. The amount your country is worth in physical form compared to the amount it's worth in paper notes is exemplified through the decreasing value of the dollar. With a never ending and rising debt, the system has to have a way to refresh itself, it's called the recession. The way our system survives is off of a high and a low, not that it's constantly going between the two, but that the majority of it's citizens are poor where as a very small portion are very wealthy. If we were all rich it wouldn't work because there would be no one working to move the economy.

Do you know what the scariest part of this is? The fact that we're being programmed from our initial existence to not question, but obey and accept things for the way they are, instead of letting our creativity grow and evolving positively as a species. Education teaches to listen, questions are only welcome if they're relevant to what's being taught. I certainly see something wrong with this. Not that math, english and science aren't important subjects to pass on to our little one's who will then end up being who inhabit and run the world, but the way these subjects are being taught is what I'm focussing on. The general view of education is flawed.

This, my friends, is modern slavery, and this is why we have these overly used terms that are taken way out of proportion such as terrorism. If the government really cared about its people, it wouldn't permit tobacco and alcohol products, it would raise the quality allowed for fast food and processed foods. It wouldn't allow for the homeless to stay homeless and for the hungry to stay hungry, it would raise the low social class to a true middle where there are no "ghetto's" or areas that provide for negative conditioning. Helpful information concerning 'real' cancer treatment and aids medications wouldn't be oppressed. We wouldn't have jails because the majority of our people wouldn't be raised in a such a conditioning where jail would be in their future, any offenders at this point would go under a re-conditioning rehabilitation centre. It would remove for corporations to be looked at as people by the courts so that the people truly responsible can be held responsible. Banks wouldn't be allowed to be private organizations. The government would allow for countries to make their own interest-free currency, money wouldn't have as big of a part in the influence of politicians. We wouldn't go to war, there would be no need for the term terrorism or anyone or group who's acts may actually be classified as terrorism - including our own military.

Imagine a world where we didn't have to deal with any of this shit... Never stop asking questions, never stop bettering yourself for you're the seed to a beautiful flower, but you have to separate yourself from this mental slavery before you can allow yourself to blossom under the light of enlightenment. For the record, there is a lot of information here and my memory's a little blurry on the specific details at the moment, so don't hold it against me if I'm wrong somewhere! Feel free to correct me though.

Monday 9 July 2012

Seven questions for religion.

I actually quite enjoy debating religion, well I enjoy debating in general but religion is a fun topic for me! I have nothing against one having beliefs, where things get fun are when said person tries to argue that their religious view is more correct than another, or that science cannot possibly add up to this view that they have.

I try to limit my beliefs and be as open as I possibly can for belief systems are really just stubborn thoughts, you're only limiting your minds potential to what the wonders of life behold, waiting to be discovered. "What do we really know about life?" This is a commonly asked question, what it means has little to do with what we currently know being wrong, but that we are only a tiny spec in the universe and so what we know is no different. Of course, what we currently think we know may not all be accurate, but it depends what your authority is concerning said knowledge base, science accepts the possibility of being wrong and is open to change - it's already taken that into account. On the other hand, this post is concerning religion, something that is generally a little more ignorant towards change.

These are seven questions that I ask in any argument,or debate. Although I did quite a bit of research into different religious views, I was raised as a Christian, so my examples are usually a little more biased towards that side of religion. None-the-less, let us get started!

1) Why do we have to have been created, what's wrong with evolution?

We understand much more about the universe based on science, evolution is a very real thing. It means change over time, the moment to come will have changed from the current moment, that is evolution on a very small scale.

One of the arguments I find religious people like to make is, "how could life have been created by chance?" Well, there's a few words in there that make that question extremely biased, in favour of religion. Those words would be "created" and "chance." Nothing was "there" to create life (other than life itself, of course), the big bang was like a spark turning into a fire, the spark was only one factor in how we've got to this point in time. Chance? What is random about this? Nothing is truly random, life is actually pretty organized. Life travels down the path of least resistance, it just continues, moves onward. What's random is assuming that there is a God, that is a physical entity, that created life - which brings us to our next question.

2) If there is a God, where did "he" come from?

If we're modelling God as a "he," we're modelling "him" after ourselves which means we're viewing "him" as a being similar to how we're beings. If this is the case, where did "he" come from? Even if we aren't labelling God as a being similar to how we're beings, where did this God come from?

3) What is God, and how do you know?

This idea of God comes from self proclaimed man-made religious stories, and there is absolutely nothing to even prove that the supposed writers existed as who they claimed to be, let alone God.

4) If God commanded humans to write your religious books, but you only know about God through your religious books, how genuine is this idea of God?

This question is extremely self explanatory... There really isn't much else I can say.

5) If your religion is the only right or correct religion, then what about all of the other religions that equally claim to be the only right or correct religion?

Especially concerning religions of which are so similar to each other as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. What about Baha'i Faith, Buddhism, Hinduism, Confucianism, Jainism, Shinto, Sikhism, Taoism, and many other belief systems from Satanism, to Gypsies, or even Vampirism? These are just examples of religions, what about the various sections that they're broken down into, how do you define what is right from wrong when they all claim to be the only correct view? The general answer is either "the devil did it" or that "it comes down to personal choice," which isn't the worst answer to give, but it completely undermines the point of having a belief.

6) If you believe in Jesus, what do you think of the hundreds of other Jesus' who all followed the same story line over different ages, and through different belief systems, all similar to christianity?

The best example I can give of this is Horus; the Egyptian Jesus three thousand years before Jesus. Here's an interesting Wikipedia page I stumbled accross on Jesus Christ in comparative mythology if anyone's interested in furthering their knowledge on this subject — or maybe you're just curious, there's nothing wrong with that!

7) What is the history of your religion, and the history of religion in general?

If you're going to have a religious belief system, at least understand it. Faith isn't an excuse for stubborn ignorance. Actually, as it turns out, religion didn't originally mean what it does today. This whole literal interpretation of looking at life as God is more of a modern thing, religion used to mean what we essentially look at as Spirituality today - which is that God is in the self and that we are life.

Christianity may have the oldest known book, but the first religious texts are from Hinduism, which is the oldest known organized religion. Hinduism didn't originally have anything to do with a God, just Karma and Reincarnation. There were only a few scripts compared to the golden book of how not to live. Of course the Bible, among other religious books or texts, does have a lot of good information and stories to tell, but it's been taken completely out of context and way too literally for its own good - they're just stories. Unless one can step out of his own stubborn thoughts, he won't be able to understand them. As far as I'm concerned, our purpose is whatever we make it - if you were told that your purpose was to pick flowers all day since you were young, that's what you would do because that's what's been put in your head. I'm not so against religion, just these stubborn interpretations of it that take away any real meaning from God. God isn't a being of his own, God is life, the universe, shit like that, and religion is an ancient people's interpretation of life. In the end if the day, religion has a very simple message, and that of a message of Love.