Sunday, April 22, 2012

What Part Goes to Heaven?

I'm always amazed at the number of people who respond to the Conservative columns and articles on various web sites.  Indeed, I'm amazed at the passion, vitriol, misinformation, lack of logic,  mis-interpretation of events, and  the ability to create something from nothing.  I speak, of course, of our 'friends' the Liberals. Tell me please, were they all born like that?  Or was their Liberalism a taught or conscious effort?  I can't understand such continual manipulation of reality coming from a serious person.  So, I must conclude that a genetic flaw or a special kind of insanity must be required to be a Liberal.

I was once read an opinion by Dinesh D'Souza about Liberal myths and radical Islam, and it was followed by over a hundred comments of varying quality, mostly the poorly written Liberal kind.  Perhaps Liberals should be forced to take literacy and intelligence tests before being given keyboards? [Right: Kabul Afghanistan from a nearby hill.] What I've learned over the years is that the radical Islamic Arabs don't need any particular reason to hate. Their lives are devoted to misinterpretation, misinformation, hate, murder, racism, mysogyny and the expected 70 virgins each in Heaven after they've killed themselves [I know.  The last two concepts don't really mesh.] 

They're taught those things from toddlerhood.  They even fight and try to destroy each other. I can't say they're killing an inordinate number of westerners in Afghanistan or other areas with their suicide bombing---some yes, but not as many as the main-stream media would have us believe.  Actually, they're killing mostly fellow Islamic Arabs.  And thankfully, such bombings are in decline. Tell me now, do the above mentioned activities rate high on the list of anyone's understanding of right and wrong or God?  And for you you pavlovian Liberal reactors, would you like to spend a month living in Bagdad or Kabul interacting with the populace? For a moment, let's assume there are 70 virgins in Heaven for each suicide bomber [Though, I'm not sure how many virgin hunks are reserved for the female bombers.]  And it's uncertain where these virgins would come from---but let's skip that problem for this discussion. 

If they're [the virgins] in Heaven to glorify God as passed souls are, why would they be interested in some sleazeball, maniacal suicide bombers of men, women, and children?  And won't these bombers be missing a few vital body parts as well?  Bombs do distribute "debris", don't they?  Since they don't believe in our Western concept of the soul, just what part of them is going to be in the hereafter or hereunder?  Is Isis or her handmaidens going to be around to put these suicide bombers back together again?  Why would the goddess want to do it anyway?  Didn't she have enough trouble with her brother Osiris?  [Humpty Dumpty call your office.] On the other hand, what makes anyone think that such bombers will gain Heaven in the first place?  Is that the kind of Heaven the average Islamic Arabs think exists?  That doesn't seem quite right.  Heaven is Heaven.  Heaven is a reward for good in its many manifestations.  Murderers need not apply. But one has to wonder as well, why do the so-called peaceful Islamic Arabs permit this pernicious radicalism to continue? 

How can we believe that Islam is a religion and not a cult?  How can we believe that Islam has peace in it's message?  It's up to the average adherents of Islam to start showing some common sense, toleration, and a real message of peace.  They need to start actively opposing the radicals. This farce of a peaceful religion---has been apparent for centuries. In 1786, Thomas Jefferson and John Adams were sent to negotiate with Tripoli's envoy to London, Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman or (Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja). They inquired "concerning the ground[s] of the pretensions [of Tripoli] to make war upon nations who had done them no injury." The ambassador replied: "It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every muslim who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemy's ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once." 

Another thing I wonder about is the philosophical and scientific thought of the Middle East.  Recently, our President spouted the non-existent contributions to our society by the Muslims.  It was laughable, and proves again this Country is being 'led' by a group of amateurs.  Several thousand years ago, some of the Arabic doctors, thinkers and tinkerers were the best in the world.  What happened?  Oh, wait a minute?  The Arabs didn't invade the area until the 7th century.  I forgot.  Anyway, anything modern in the Arab world seems to originate in the West.  Tell me now.  Take away the so-called 'Koran scholars' and what's left?  Where are the Arab thinkers?  Scientists?  Where are the Arab scientific institutes?  The Arab airplane factories?  The Arab think-tanks? International Arab auditing firms?  The sanctioned Arab Women Rights groups? The large scale Arab Food production?  Anyone taste the new Jordanian Cornflakes lately?   I've got nothing against average Arabs mind you [I like the people, their food, and much of their culture], but their radical brethren have done them a great disservice with their criminal activities, as has their adherence to a violent 'religion.' 

As Will Rogers used to say, "I only know what I read in the papers."  And I don't see anything that impresses me about the Middle East lately, even with the Liberal bias in most main-stream media news items.  Besides, you don't have to be among the radical Arabs to be maniacal.  The Iranians aren't Arabs.  In reality, they're Persians---from the name of the country before Iran.  I like the old labeling better.  Yet, they're all Muslims with the associative violent and sexist agendas.  And I wouldn't be holding a beer and hot dog picnic in Iran anytime soon, despite some [destroyed] reformist uprisings. Our interest in the Middle East is essentially based on the need for oil.  There's no secret about it.  Our national interests depend on oil.  Our military needs oil.  Our industry depends on oil.  Our farms, homes, and consumer product industries depend on oil.  Gasoline; plastics; chemicals; foods; clothing; paints; inks; aeronautical fuel; pesticides; handheld blackberries; computers; telephones; buildings; swimming pools---Can the Liberals shun all these and other related products?  If they did, we wouldn't have to worry about them. They'd probably lack even the essentials of civilization.  [Though they could still have toilet paper, as long as it's all handmade from dead leaves, and they only use a few sheets at a time.] 

The same with all the other Liberals and closet communists around the world.  Alternatives to oil used for energy?  Well, we can't produce more nuclear power because the Liberals keep fighting plant construction.  We can't build more dams for hydroelectric power because the Liberals don't like them either.  And don't put up any windmills near a Liberal's home, they'll spoil the view.  Though a few windmills near Al Gore's home might be a good idea.  Imagine being able to put all that hot air to good use. Pundits now say that oil is headed for $250 a barrel.  Imagine that?  And still the Liberals call for more windmills, solar power panels, fewer nuclear power plants, and most dastardly, less exploration and use of our own oil and coal resources.  It seems they want the US to fail. And President Obama is leading the pack. If no oil was to be found in the Middle East, the rest of the world would probably leave the area alone so the radicals could play King of the sand dune and kill one other---as long as they kept it local, no one would be concerned.  But they probably wouldn't. 

Exportation of terror seems to be an inborn trait and would probably continue no matter what the circumstances.  [Let's see, 70 virgins times a million or so suicide bombers is about 70 million virgins just for the radical Islamic Arabs themselves.  That's a lot of chastity!] But, stability in the Middle East is now essential for everyone, and allowing the radical and semi-radical Islamic Arabs to kill each other won't do anyone any good, especially those on the short end of the stick.  So are we there trying to knock some sense into a subjugated people, or to allow them to gain their own freedom and rule with some chance of peace and tranquility for a change?  Haven't we deposed a maniacal leader who has used WMD in the past [against his own citizens?] 

Haven't we killed a pile of terrorists who would otherwise be killing people in the US and other countries---even more than they do now? Is everything going to turn to crapola if we leave too soon?  You bet it is.  $10 gasoline would be the least of our worries.  The Middle East, Africa, Asia and Europe would feel the effects of unbridled Islamic terror, and they would have no rights left to ask the US for help as they have so often in the past.  And now our President wants to to provide American Court trials and possibly foist the dangerous radicals back on the American people with all the rights we thought we had, but which are slowly eroding under the Obama administration. 

Along with his apologizing for everything else American, I'm surprised President Obama hasn't apologized for 9/11. Well King Kong is dead, and the lemurs aren't big enough.  Now, as a parting thought, why don't we move the Liberals to the Middle East where they can have love-ins with the resident maniacs and sleazeballs.  To paraphrase Neville Chamberlain: "We could have peace in our time." Coming Soon: a frank discussion with Marcus Tullius Cicero Beware of the coming tricks of President Obama: