Un-Islamic Evil Existed Before There Was an Islam

Listening to the Islamophobe elements in human society, you would think that all evil issues from Islam, you would think that in the absence of Islam there would be no evil in the world, you would think that there is nothing worse than Islam, you would think that Islam has no good qualities to it, you would think that all Muslims are identical to each other.

Time for a reality check. The fact of the matter is, that before there ever was an Islam, human beings were committing diabolical acts against other human beings and going to hell for it.

Before there was any Islam, the people who in those days were special in the eyes of God, the ancient Israelites of 3000 years ago, a people very different from the modern Jews and Israelites, were given a mission to fight with certain peoples whose culture had become degenerate, not on the grounds of racism but on the grounds that these people's culture had become ungodly.

These people the ancient Israelites were sent to fight against, posed tremendous dangers to ancient Israel. These people the ancient Israelites were sent to fight against, were very different from the people of "Islam". As a matter of fact, at least much of the Islamic world today, is closer to ancient Israel than it is to ancient Israel's enemies.

Before there ever was an Islam, the Assyrians attacked and conquered ancient Israel. These Assyrians, were pagan; much of the modern Islamist world resembles ancient Israel more than it resembles their enemy ancient Assyria. The ancient Assyrians, were renowned for their cruelty, impailing alive by the thousands those who dared resist them.

Before there ever was an Islam, Israel was conquered by its enemy ancient Persia, which was a merciful conqueror, and which allowed Israel to rise again from the ashes. According to the scripture, God held hands with Cyrus the king of ancient Persia to guide ancient Persia into godly ways, even though this Cyrus the king of ancient Persia, despite being led by God, did not know God. Much of modern Islam has more in common with ancient Israel than it does with even the kindly ancient Persia.

Before there ever was an Islam, according to scripture, Jews were going to hell for sins such as abuse of their fellow Jews; and also pagans and Christians were ending up damned for their sins.

Before there ever was an Islam, both Jew and Christian suffered terribly under the cruel persecutions perpetrated by pagan ancient Rome. Much of modern Islam, has more in common with the Jews and Christians meanly attacked by ancient pagan Rome, than it does with ancient pagan Rome.

The Book of Revelation, speaks in symbolic form of evil empires of ancient days wickedly persecuting the Church. It is foolish to think, as many self important hubristic American Christians do, that the Book of Revelation's symbols refer exclusively to current and future events, as if mankind of antiquity, contemporaneous with the author of the Book of Revelation, was somehow less important in God's eyes than modern mankind. The Book of Revelation was written before Islam ever even came to exist. Much of modern Islam, is closer to the Christians persecuted by the "beast" of Revelation than it is to the persecuting "beast".


The modern world of "Islam", is not a homogenous monolith. Wide variety is to be found in the world of Islam in terms of belief, attitude, and practice. It is too bad that fanatically anti-Islamic elements in the world have deliberately and also accidentally contrary to their wishes, set in motion events that have strengthened the lower elements in modern Islam while weakening the higher.

The sad reality people stick their heads in the sand to avoid, is that the modern enemies of Islam, have alot in common with the empires renowned for their wickedness and cruelty in pre-Islamic times.



@2006 David Virgil Hobbs

American Men Un-manageably Proud(?)

O say, can you see, by the dawn's early light,
What so proudly we hail'd at the twilight's last gleaming?

I often feel, that generally speaking, American men are basically un-manageable, due to their pride.

Some American men are proud of being tall. Some are proud of their muscles. Some are proud of the size of their penis. Some are proud of the fact that they have the same last name as a pro athlete. Some are proud that they have the same last name as a Playboy playmate.

Some are proud that they live in a nation that is "the most powerful nation on earth" and that can wipe other countries off the map in minutes. Although it is simply an accident of birth that they were born as Americans and others were born say in India, and although obviously a man is not less of a man than an American simply because of the accident that he happened to be born in say a small nation like Norway, such men feel superior to others simply because they happened to be born into the militarily "omnipotent" US of A.

As a result of their pride, they will not obey or serve or protect ethical and intelligent leaders; and their lukewarm movements in the direction of such obedience and service are half-hearted.

Since so many of them are so proud, they never get energetically active by way of service to God or Country or Race or Religion or Humanity if such service is not rewarded by a paycheck-carrot. They only get energetically active, when there is the carrot of a paycheck waiting as a reward for their actions. Due to their pride, when such a paycheck-carrot is waiting for them, they move like automotons, robots, there is nothing they will not do to get the paycheck-carrot, the possibility of refusing to do something they are ordered to do as a result of which they will not receive their paycheck-carrot does not even enter their minds. The paycheck is a reward for THEM, and pride is about putting the self on a pedestal.

Many American men seem to be addicted to pride, the way people get addicted to alcohol or heroin or nicotine. They seem to feel uncomfortable, disoriented, lost, when the spirit of hubris temporarily leaves them.

Professional athletes, are in a unique situation, a situation different from the situation the general public finds itself in. The fact they are pro athletes does not mean in and of itself mean that they have any special gift in terms of ethics or wisdom. Still, plenty of American men worship pro athletes, as if pro athletes, as incarnations of God, are something to be imitated. They worship the pro athletes because the pro athletes to an exaggerated extent, possess some characteristic they are proud of, such as a level of physical strength or height that exceeds the strength and height found amongst most of the world's males. This worship of pro athletes, re-inforces conduct of the proud type, such as lackadaisicality in public service.

Last night I had a dream, in which me and about fifty other people were in this large room with high ceilings, that looked like the main room at Harvard's Widener Library. It was night-time, the room was lit by slightly yellowish indoor lighting, the room contained high bookshelves on the walls filled with crimson colored books, light brown colored globes representing planet earth, and brown wooden tables. In this dream the American people had appointed me to be their leader; yet still we studied side by side in this library room as if we were all equals. My job as their leader was to tell all these representatives of special interests that came to me asking for favors, to bug off. A short thin white guy with black hair and a shaved down beard, who was wearing mostly white pants and a short sleeved shirt that was mostly white, came to me asking me for favors for his special interest. I told him no. And I was thinking, these people appoint me their leader, they expect to tell all these special interests to bug off, and yet they fail to provide me with the physical security that would protect me from being assassinated or kidnapped!

American men who think that there is something Christian or virtuous about pride need to be sent back to Sunday School, as the following scriptures attest:

(Lev 26:19) And I will break the pride of your power; and I will make your heaven as iron, and your earth as brass:

(1Sa 17:28) And Eliab his eldest brother heard when he spoke unto the men; and Eliab's anger was kindled against David, and he said, Why camest thou down hither? and with whom hast thou left those few sheep in the wilderness? I know thy pride, and the naughtiness of thine heart; for thou art come down that thou mightest see the battle.

(2Ch 32:26) Notwithstanding Hezekiah humbled himself for the pride of his heart, both he and the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the wrath of the LORD came not upon them in the days of Hezekiah.

(Job 33:17) That he may withdraw man from his purpose, and hide pride from man.

(Job 35:12) There they cry, but none giveth answer, because of the pride of evil men.

(Job 41:15) His scales are his pride, shut up together as with a close seal.

(Job 41:34) He beholdeth all high things: he is a king over all the children of pride.

(Psa 10:2) The wicked in his pride doth persecute the poor: let them be taken in the devices that they have imagined.

(Psa 10:4) The wicked, through the pride of his countenance, will not seek after God: God is not in all his thoughts.

(Psa 31:20) Thou shalt hide them in the secret of thy presence from the pride of man: thou shalt keep them secretly in a pavilion from the strife of tongues.

(Psa 36:11) Let not the foot of pride come against me, and let not the hand of the wicked remove me.

(Psa 59:12) For the sin of their mouth and the words of their lips let them even be taken in their pride: and for cursing and lying which they speak.

(Psa 73:6) Therefore pride compasseth them about as a chain; violence covereth them as a garment.

(Pro 8:13) The fear of the LORD is to hate evil: pride, and arrogance, and the evil way, and the froward mouth, do I hate.

(Pro 11:2) When pride cometh, then cometh shame: but with the lowly is wisdom.

(Pro 13:10) Only by pride cometh contention: but with the well advised is wisdom.

(Pro 14:3) In the mouth of the foolish is a rod of pride: but the lips of the wise shall preserve them.

(Pro 16:18) Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.

(Pro 29:23) A man's pride shall bring him low: but honor shall uphold the humble in spirit.

(Isa 9:9) And all the people shall know, even Ephraim and the inhabitant of Samaria, that say in the pride and stoutness of heart,

(Isa 16:6) We have heard of the pride of Moab; he is very proud: even of his haughtiness, and his pride, and his wrath: but his lies shall not be so.

(Isa 23:9) The LORD of hosts hath purposed it, to stain the pride of all glory, and to bring into contempt all the honorable of the earth.

(Isa 25:11) And he shall spread forth his hands in the midst of them, as he that swimmeth spreadeth forth his hands to swim: and he shall bring down their pride together with the spoils of their hands.

(Isa 28:1) Woe to the crown of pride, to the drunkards of Ephraim, whose glorious beauty is a fading flower, which are on the head of the fat valleys of them that are overcome with wine!

(Isa 28:3) The crown of pride, the drunkards of Ephraim, shall be trodden under feet:

(Jer 13:9) Thus saith the LORD, After this manner will I mar the pride of Judah, and the great pride of Jerusalem.

(Jer 13:17) But if ye will not hear it, my soul shall weep in secret places for your pride; and mine eye shall weep sore, and run down with tears, because the LORD's flock is carried away captive.

(Jer 48:29) We have heard the pride of Moab, (he is exceeding proud) his loftiness, and his arrogance, and his pride, and the haughtiness of his heart.

(Jer 49:16) Thy terribleness hath deceived thee, and the pride of thine heart, O thou that dwellest in the clefts of the rock, that holdest the height of the hill: though thou shouldest make thy nest as high as the eagle, I will bring thee down from thence, saith the LORD.

(Eze 7:10) Behold the day, behold, it is come: the morning is gone forth; the rod hath blossomed, pride hath budded.

(Eze 16:49) Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister Sodom, pride, fullness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy.

(Eze 16:56) For thy sister Sodom was not mentioned by thy mouth in the day of thy pride,

(Eze 30:6) Thus saith the LORD; They also that uphold Egypt shall fall; and the pride of her power shall come down: from the tower of Syene shall they fall in it by the sword, saith the Lord GOD.

(Dan 4:37) Now I Nebuchadnezzar praise and extol and honor the King of heaven, all whose works are truth, and his ways judgment: and those that walk in pride he is able to abase.

(Dan 5:20) But when his heart was lifted up, and his mind hardened in pride, he was deposed from his kingly throne, and they took his glory from him:

(Hos 5:5) And the pride of Israel doth testify to his face: therefore shall Israel and Ephraim fall in their iniquity; Judah also shall fall with them.

(Hos 7:10) And the pride of Israel testifieth to his face: and they do not return to the LORD their God, nor seek him for all this.

(Oba 1:3) The pride of thine heart hath deceived thee, thou that dwellest in the clefts of the rock, whose habitation is high; that saith in his heart, Who shall bring me down to the ground?

(Zep 2:10) This shall they have for their pride, because they have reproached and magnified themselves against the people of the LORD of hosts.

(Zep 3:11) In that day shalt thou not be ashamed for all thy doings, wherein thou hast transgressed against me: for then I will take away out of the midst of thee them that rejoice in thy pride, and thou shalt no more be haughty because of my holy mountain.

(Zec 9:6) And a bastard shall dwell in Ashdod, and I will cut off the pride of the Philistines.

(Zec 10:11) And he shall pass through the sea with affliction, and shall smite the waves in the sea, and all the deeps of the river shall dry up: and the pride of Assyria shall be brought down, and the scepter of Egypt shall depart away.

(Zec 11:3) There is a voice of the howling of the shepherds; for their glory is spoiled: a voice of the roaring of young lions; for the pride of Jordan is spoiled.

(Mar 7:22) Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness:

(1Ti 3:6) Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil.

(1Jo 2:16) For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.


----------

(Job 9:13) If God will not withdraw his anger, the proud helpers do stoop under him.

(Job 26:12) He divideth the sea with his power, and by his understanding he smiteth through the proud.

(Job 38:11) And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed?

(Job 40:11) Cast abroad the rage of thy wrath: and behold every one that is proud, and abase him.

(Job 40:12) Look on every one that is proud, and bring him low; and tread down the wicked in their place.

(Psa 12:3) The LORD shall cut off all flattering lips, and the tongue that speaketh proud things:

(Psa 31:23) O love the LORD, all ye his saints: for the LORD preserveth the faithful, and plentifully rewardeth the proud doer.

(Psa 40:4) Blessed is that man that maketh the LORD his trust, and respecteth not the proud, nor such as turn aside to lies.

(Psa 86:14) O God, the proud are risen against me, and the assemblies of violent men have sought after my soul; and have not set thee before them.

(Psa 94:2) Lift up thyself, thou judge of the earth: render a reward to the proud.

(Psa 101:5) Whoso privily slandereth his neighbor, him will I cut off: him that hath a high look and a proud heart will not I suffer.

(Psa 119:21) Thou hast rebuked the proud that are cursed, which do err from thy commandments.

(Psa 119:51) The proud have had me greatly in derision: yet have I not declined from thy law.

(Psa 119:69) The proud have forged a lie against me: but I will keep thy precepts with my whole heart.

(Psa 119:78) Let the proud be ashamed; for they dealt perversely with me without a cause: but I will meditate in thy precepts.

(Psa 119:85) The proud have digged pits for me, which are not after thy law.

(Psa 119:122) Be surety for thy servant for good: let not the proud oppress me.

(Psa 123:4) Our soul is exceedingly filled with the scorning of those that are at ease, and with the contempt of the proud.

(Psa 124:5) Then the proud waters had gone over our soul.

(Psa 138:6) Though the LORD be high, yet hath he respect unto the lowly: but the proud he knoweth afar off.

(Psa 140:5) The proud have hid a snare for me, and cords; they have spread a net by the wayside; they have set gins for me. Selah.

(Pro 6:17) A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,

(Pro 15:25) The LORD will destroy the house of the proud: but he will establish the border of the widow.

(Pro 16:5) Every one that is proud in heart is an abomination to the LORD: though hand join in hand, he shall not be unpunished.

(Pro 16:19) Better it is to be of a humble spirit with the lowly, than to divide the spoil with the proud.

(Pro 21:4) A high look, and a proud heart, and the plowing of the wicked, is sin.

(Pro 21:24) Proud and haughty scorner is his name, who dealeth in proud wrath.

(Pro 28:25) He that is of a proud heart stirreth up strife: but he that putteth his trust in the LORD shall be made fat.

(Ecc 7:8) Better is the end of a thing than the beginning thereof: and the patient in spirit is better than the proud in spirit.

(Isa 2:12) For the day of the LORD of hosts shall be upon every one that is proud and lofty, and upon every one that is lifted up; and he shall be brought low:

(Isa 13:11) And I will punish the world for their evil, and the wicked for their iniquity; and I will cause the arrogance of the proud to cease, and will lay low the haughtiness of the terrible.

(Isa 16:6) We have heard of the pride of Moab; he is very proud: even of his haughtiness, and his pride, and his wrath: but his lies shall not be so.

(Jer 13:15) Hear ye, and give ear; be not proud: for the LORD hath spoken.

(Jer 43:2) Then spoke Azariah the son of Hoshaiah, and Johanan the son of Kareah, and all the proud men, saying unto Jeremiah, Thou speakest falsely: the LORD our God hath not sent thee to say, Go not into Egypt to sojourn there:

(Jer 48:29) We have heard the pride of Moab, (he is exceeding proud) his loftiness, and his arrogance, and his pride, and the haughtiness of his heart.

(Jer 50:29) Call together the archers against Babylon: all ye that bend the bow, camp against it round about; let none thereof escape: recompense her according to her work; according to all that she hath done, do unto her: for she hath been proud against the LORD, against the Holy One of Israel.

(Jer 50:31) Behold, I am against thee, O thou most proud, saith the Lord GOD of hosts: for thy day is come, the time that I will visit thee.

(Jer 50:32) And the most proud shall stumble and fall, and none shall raise him up: and I will kindle a fire in his cities, and it shall devour all round about him.

(Hab 2:5) Yea also, because he transgresseth by wine, he is a proud man, neither keepeth at home, who enlargeth his desire as hell, and is as death, and cannot be satisfied, but gathereth unto him all nations, and heapeth unto him all people:

(Mal 3:15) And now we call the proud happy; yea, they that work wickedness are set up; yea, they that tempt God are even delivered.

(Mal 4:1) For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.

(Luk 1:51) He hath showed strength with his arm; he hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their hearts.

(Rom 1:30) Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,

(1Ti 6:4) He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings.

(2Ti 3:2) For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,

(Jam 4:6) But he giveth more grace. Wherefore he saith, God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.

(1Pe 5:5) Likewise, ye younger, submit yourselves unto the elder. Yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth grace to the humble.

Reggie Bush and Myself are Like Twins: Dream

The dream:

I was a student on the Harvard University campus. Most of the students and teachers on campus seemed to be American black males. Reggie Bush the American tackle football phenom was one of the students on the campus. I could feel and sense the similarity between me and Reggie Bush. It was as if Reggie Bush and I were twins. He has been a tackle football great for years and I have recently morphed into a soccer great. Reggie Bush is a pro rookie about 22 years old, I am in my forties, but since I have spent alot of time not messing around with soccer, college and pro level soccer is as new to me as college and pro level tackle football is new to Reggie Bush. The 2006 World Cup was the first time in my life I have taken a close look at the top level of soccer, the first time I have ever recorded games, then analyzed them using pause, reverse, fast forward, forward, slow motion, frame by frame.

I was one of about eighty students in some class about things like sports and soccer. I was a top student in the class. The large modern carpeted classroom was dimly lit with a yellowish light, the students and the teacher were black silhouettes. In the class room I did some flashy juggling with the ball, standing in place and kicking the ball high over my head with my feet three or four times; however in real waking life I have not been doing this kind of juggling, because in my judgement, in a game, if you do this kind of juggling, a defender will just come up to you and knock the ball away--and in real life I have not developed to my knowledge, competence in this kind of juggling.

I had started writing out a movie script featuring about a half dozen black men from the campus in starring roles. These black men all looked different from each other, they were all cool in their own unique way. It was a good, solid, competent well done movie script but only about the first half hour of the two hour movie had been gotten done.

I was in a weightlifting class. The inside of the weightlifting class looked like the inside of the soccer slash sports class, there were about forty students in the weightlifting class, most of the students were black males, seemed the teacher was black, the class was dimly lit with yellow lights except for extra brightness up at the front where the teacher was, there was carpeting on the floor, it was a big modern classroom, everyone in the class looked like a black silhouette. We did lots of reps with the barbell in some exercise meant to build up the shoulders. My shoulders became big huge brown muscular shoulders in just the first hour of this kind of weightlifting in this class.

I was way behind on about three of the academic classes, I knew this as I looked at some lounge lit with yellow light, which had brown furniture and brown carpeting. I was hopelessly behind in these three classes. I had been skipping classes, skipping examinations, not studying. The only question remaining for these three classes, was, would I be able to bail out on them, drop them, so the grade was "incomplete", or "course never taken"; or was it too late for this would I end up getting an F in all three courses.

I saw a couple of men from the white minority on the campus. One was of moderate not-fat build, about six feet tall, almost black hair, beard and mustache, trimmed short, severe and serious looking, in his forties. The other one was it seemed clean shaven, with straight medium brown hair average length for a man, about six feet tall, athletically built, did not see his face but seemed he was handsome, he was in his twenties.

There were some unremembered details to the dream.

In real life I have been having trouble just getting out of bed and just getting to soccer practice and doing the soccer practice, because I have come to realize how people love to discriminate on the basis of age, and this is demoralizing and discouraging.

See http://www.angelfire.com/ma/vincemoon/Soccairtwo.htm to read about my soccer exploits.

Logical Errors(?) in President Bush's August 22 News Conference

After boiling down Mr. Sir President Bush's words during his press conference of August 21, 2006, what you end up with is roughly as follows (paraphrased):

We must fight the Islamofascists by promoting freedom in the mideast. We must not withdraw from Iraq before the mission is complete. We must help reformers fight the Islamofascists. Premature withdrawal from Iraq will embolden the Islamofascists and send the message that we are apathetic about combatting terror through freedom and discourage reformers. Premature withdrawal from Iraq will harm USA security, result in Islamofascist terrorism in the USA, and create a more dangerous world. The world would be worse off with Saddam Hussein in power in Iraq. Al Qaeda which was responsible for 911 is trying to get us out of Iraq by promoting civil strife.

An Islamofascist Iraq will be a safe haven for terrorists. Resentment and lack of hope caused by lack of freedom give rise to suicide bombers who attack us. We must believe we can beat the Islamofascists. We must shed our dependence on foreign oil. Chaos in Iraq will unsettle the mideast. Premature withdrawal tells troops their efforts were not worth it. We need the Patriot Act and spying to defend ourselves against the Islamofascists. The Islamofascists will have oil revenues to use against us if we lose Iraq.

This all has to do with the idea that if some action improves the security situation vis a vis Islamofascists, then we should go ahead with the action.

The logical error in this kind of thinking, which we have seen in the speeches made by the rude and angry Farah at WND and others, and which we have seen in the editorial pages of major newspapers with regard to important issues aside from the "Islamofascist threat", is this: the mere fact that some action improves the situation does not mean that this action is a wise choice.

The question is, is the given action the wisest use of limited available resources? Action A and Action B could both result in an improvement in terms of the security situation for the USA and in terms of the welfare of the world, yet at the same time, Action B could be a superior alternative because the benefit-cost ratio is superior to the benefit-cost ratio of Action A. Therefore the mere fact that some action improves the situation, does not indicate that said action should be carried out.

Mr. Sir President Dubya Bush himself talked of the need for quality intelligence information, and the importance of weaning of the USA off its dependence for foreign oil because such strengthens the USA economically (this in contradiction to Nixon's strange idea that we should get the USA hooked on foreign oil so that the USA does not become apathetic about the mideast), and the advantage of depriving "Islamofascist terrorists" of oil revenues through the establishment of democracy in Iraq.

Therefore the obvious alternative to the use of resources in military crusades designed to establish democracy in the mideast, is to use such resources to improve intelligence capabilities and to strengthen the USA economy and deprive "Islamofascist terrorists" of funds, through the development of energy conservation initiatives and alternative domestic energy sources.

Mr. Sir Prez Dubya however failed to establish, how the use of limited national resources in military crusades to spread democracy, is superior to the use of such limited national resources in crusades to improve intelligence capabilities and shift the nation from dependence on foreign oil to the use of energy-conservation technologies and alternative domestic energy resources.

Mr. Sir Prez Dubya produced a list of the advantages of "staying the course" in Iraq. This resembled the laundry lists produced by major newspapers, listing the advantages of entering into free trade treaties which have in the end turned the USA into an economic mirage based on money borrowed from foreigners. A list of the advantages of given actions, is not an adequate defense of such actions. What is required is a list of both the advantages and disadvantages of various policy options, together with an analysis showing which actions produce the better advantage/disadvantage ratio.

Mr. Sir Prez Dubya's emphasis in his news conference was on spreading democracy by force of arms as a way of combatting "Islamofascism". Yet the fact remains, that the USA has been involved in aggression against mideast nations that have been holding elections that some would say, are cleaner and more democratic than the elections we hold here in the USA; and at the same time the USA has allied itself with "Islamofascist" mideast nations.

How can it be left unexplained, why the arguments that justify such alliances with "Islamofascist" regimes, and against "democratic" regimes, do not refute the arguments in favor of a military crusade to spread democracy in the mideast?

The military efforts in Iraq, which have employed a new generation of weaponry, have coincided with dramatic increases in the incidence of serious diseases in the theaters of conflict and amongst USA troops involved in these conflicts. These crusades have produced widespread loss of life and economic damage.

How can it be left unexplained, how public health problems, death, and economic destruction, are supposed to in the minds of the mideastern peoples, be outweighed by the blessings of the introduction of a system of government that the administration labels "democracy"? How can mideast persons be expected to cherish a form of government promoted by the same forces that unleash disease, death, and poverty amongst them?

Many people would prefer to be physically healthy, alive, and economically prosperous in a totalitarian nation, as opposed to deathly ill or dead or penniless in a so-called "democracy".

Mr. Prez Dubya, said that the "Islamofascist" form of government, gives rise to hopelesness and despair amongst the inhabitants of the mideast, which expresses itself in attacks on western democracies. Now wait a minute. If some young man from the middle east is feeling hopeless and despondent because his nation is under authoritarian rule, why would he give vent to his dissatisfaction by attacking western democracies? Seems the more understandable thing for such a man to do, would be to attack his own authoritarian government which produces such feelings of grief inside of him.

Mr. Sir Prez Dubya, said that Al Qaeda, which he seems to think was responsible for 911, is busy stirring up Sunni vs Shia sectarian strife in Iraq. The question is, why would Al Qaeda stir up violence between Sunni and Shia, when the Sunnis already have their hands full rebelling against the USA's military?



@2006 David Virgil Hobbs

Orbiting Planet Earth, the Dyrud Family, the 'msn.com' Girls: Dreams

Once in a while, a blogger reporting dreams he has had, can add the improvement of a human touch to a blog. I haven't been bothering with reporting most of my dreams, but last time I was asleep I had a dream that seemed special in terms of the fact that it was more emotional than most dreams.

In the first dream I had last time I lied down to sleep (my sleep was interrupted lately I have been able to only sleep for an hour or so at a stretch before waking up), I was orbiting earth like a spacecraft, going round and round around the earth. I looked at the earth, it looked like a blue and white marble, against a black background. After orbiting earth for a while, I left the orbit and sailed off into space, further and further away from the blue and white marble.

In the second dream, the emotional one, I was in this big house where the bigshot psychiatrist Jarl Dyrud and his daughter Anne, who went to my high school lived. There was a front door, and then inside the house about five yards in from the front door, there were some steps, about four of them, leading up to where there was a second door, and then inside the second door was the living room, the kitchen etc etc. I was sitting on these steps leading to the second door, facing the door that led to the outdoors. Seemed that these steps had regularly been my perch for three or four days. The path from the first door to the second door including the steps I was sitting on were covered by a grayish-brown colored carpet.

A large black dog that lived in the house and belonged to the Dyruds was keeping me company. It was purring like a cat. In the area between the first door and the second door, there were lots of colorful objects, I don't remember exactly, but seemed these objects were things like toys, dolls, that kind of thing. One of the colorful objects was mostly red in color. I was thinking to myself, that I could work hard every day all my life, and still not have enough money to afford this house I was in and the things that were in the house. I could hear the noise of Anne and her friends inside the house, the noise was not loud, because it was a big house, the noise had to travel a fair distance to reach my ears. Predictably I felt happy and relaxed, not stressed and depressed as I have generally been lately.

The front door opened, Mr. Jarl Dyrud opened it and came inside. He was wearing a brown trenchcoat and a scarf with red coloring in it. I did not see his face as he was looking downwards and to the side. The black dog that had been peaceably sitting with me and purring, approached him aggressively, seemed there might be some problem, even though this black dog was the resident dog in the house.

Next thing I knew I heard the voice of Jimmy Marks, who was a short thin cheerful loquacious freckled boy when I knew him when he attended the high school Anne and I attended. He was shouting about how in both Boston and Chicago my brother's penis was bigger than mine. This angered me and I tried to get out of bed to confront him. But as I tried to get out of bed, something held me back--it was Anne, I was lying on my back on top of her in my bed, she was lying on her back underneath me, I had not even realized she was there, and with her arms she was holding the upper part of my body, and with her legs she was holding the lower part of my body, preventing me from rising from my bed to go and confront Jimmy Marks. I could sense the good part of her personality as she lay under me, she reminded me of the good part of Linda Skinner's personality (Linda also went to my high school and her dad was also a bigshot doctor), mentally strong, smart, concerned--but it seems to me in reality she and Linda Skinner (I've heard the same kinds of rumor about Linda Skinner wanting to repair her broken relationship with me) have been rivalrous with each other, jealous of each other.

Seems you can get these weird results, two women getting jealous of each other, and then what you end up with is that your relationship with both of them gets broken. As I struggled to attempt to get out of the bed the dream ended. I wonder if the dream had anything to do with me having sent an email to the "Royal Norwegian Embassy". I experienced a fun, happy relaxed atmosphere in the dream, which in my mind contradicted some vision a Catholic saint, Hildegard I think it was, had about Lutherans (the Dyruds I would guess have a Lutheran background) descending into hell. Then again I am not a Lutheran and they were being nice and hospitable with me.

Waking up I was thinking to myself, yet another example of me being Christian, forgiving, un-angry when asleep, compared to being unforgiving and angry when awake. While awake I had been angrily thinking, I've heard what seem to me to be rumors that Anne wants to repair her relationship with me, but how in heck can she expect me to psychically discern this, and how can she burden me with the burden of tracking her down and contacting her? And while being awake I had been feeling angry that I should have to pursue Linda with phone calls etc., as opposed to vice versa.

The third dream I had last time I laid down to sleep, I was out on the basketball court practicing soccer, at the outdoors basketball court where in real waking life I was doing so well practicing soccer that on two different occasions carloads of people stopped for twenty to thirty minutes to stare at me as if they were looking at a ghost, and where a couple of teenagers expressed how they felt the great Diego Maradona was not my equal. As I practiced, the thought in my head, was that in practicing soccer I was sort of struggling in behalf of these two strong, pretty, and very busty women, one from Arlington School in Belmont who shocked me by coming on to me in a McDonalds, and the other this woman who works at the local Supermarket who one day blurted out to me "I do". In the dream, the photo I often see at msn.com lately, of two young women wearing pink hats, who resemble these two women, which when clicked on leads to http://obey.msn.com/?GT1=8427 was a photo of these two women. This dream about playing soccer for them was not as emotional as the one about Anne, who is more moderately built than these two.

By the way, I had a dream a few years ago that one day people would say that I am a better player than Diego Maradona, but I paid it no attention since at the time I thought I was not fast enough (an old wives tale is that you can't get faster and won't get faster than you are in high school), and since I had been schooled to think of such dreams as "wish fulfillment".

When I awoke I was thinking of how I have heard this deep-voiced announcer carrying on about how busty women are easily tortured and will apostasize from Christianity under torture, and are not "tough" in conflict. The thoughts in my mind when I awoke, were that at times when I have been "in the Spirit", that is strongly able to feel God's Spirit, I had not even thought about the question of whether I would apostasize under torture, I had not even thought about whether I would be tough enough to endure torture without apostasizing: this in part because though many Christians are swayed hither and thither by non-biblical testimonies, my Christianity has always been based on the Bible which emphasizes the love of God and tells believers to be faithful unto the death but does not specifically demand that they tough it out under horrible tortures.

Can "Clean" Democracy-Style Elections Produce Adequate Government for the USA Today?

The domestic critics and opponents of the current government of the USA are obsessed with: clean and fair elections, bringing criminals to justice, bringing about an isolationist foreign policy, and sealing the borders.

Problem is, in their enthusiasm for these things they nostalgically long for, they forget that even if all these dreams of theirs were to be realized, their country & by extension its natural allies would still be in a sorry and pathetic state. They forget that from 1980 to 2000, the elections were cleaner (few complaints have been heard about most of them), there were not as many criminals getting away with crimes, the USA was not involved in wars, but still, nevertheless, the USA was in a sorry state and had already committed crimes against foreigners and become a loser and the father of the bastard that is the USA today.

They forget, that all this mis-government that they now hate, inherited a national and international situation that was created by the "cleanly elected" democracy-style elections of the past. The situation created by these elected governments has had a major impact on the conduct of the current leaders of the USA nation.

They forget, that the American democracy has in the past shown itself incapable of doing things that have to be done; and they forget that even a USA government elected through clean elections, will all the more be completely incapable of dealing with current problems that by comparison dwarf the problems the nostalgically longed-for US democracies of the past had to face.

Plenty of the macho patriots seem to be too fat-headed to understand that militaries and spy agencies run on money. The USA is economically speaking a mirage in a desert; everything is running on money borrowed from foreigners by the federal government, by the state governments, by the local governments, by the businesses, and by the consumers. One dollar borrowed from foreigners can swirl around the country changing hands as things are bought and sold adding twenty dollars to the USA economy. Likewise the reverse takes effect as the bills come due resulting in one dollar paid back to foreign creditors taking twenty dollars in income out of the economy. This situation began to exist and existed even in the days when the elections were elections regarding which few ever ended up complaing about their legitimacy.

the "cleanly elected" governments created by voting in the past, gave birth to the kind of fungus-friendly climate in which the current government the critics hate was able to seize control. The cleanly elected governments of the past, created for the nation a national and international situation which has had major impact on the conduct of the current government. The past democratically elected governments have failed to execute necessary indispensable reforms, and in the future such cleanly elected governments will be unable to deal with problems much more diffficult than the obstacles to reform these democratically elected governments failed to surmount in times past.

The American people are to a large extent, to one degree or another, childish, escapist, ignorant, intellectually lazy, irresponsible people who misuse their time energy and money with the result that their nation collapses. Even cleanly elected politicians can end up betraying their constituencies. Americans are too easily enticed by the carrot and threatened by the stick.

If Americans really want to save their country, they had better at the least keep an open mind with regards to non-democratic solutions--but instead Americans react to those who come up with non-democratic solutions as if they were child molesters and continue to enthuse over crusades to force foreign nations into becoming democracies. In so doing they may be the incarnation of Judas handing over Christ, sealing their own fate, helping to rush their own communities and their own nation to their doom.



@2006 David Virgil Hobbs

More Irrational Talk about Israel from Superstitious Bible Thumpers

More superstitious talk about how the world should support a nation composed of the modern ethnic group that has named itself "Israel" located in Palestine, from Farah at http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51580 . People like Farah opine that we have to attempt to maintain the so-called "Israel" in Palestine because God promised Palestine to this so-called "Israel".

Yet Farah admits that "Israel" could lose Palestine because of its shortcomings and sins, in his own words, he declares that "Israel is being led by men unworthy of God's sovereign promises to bless the Jewish state forever" .

Thus what Farah is saying is that when God promised Palestine to "Israel", God was saying not that "Israel" will always inhabit Palestine, or that the world should always support some kind of "Israel" in Palestine, but that God's will is that Israel should inhabit Palestine although this will of God could end up not being done for various reasons such as the "unworthiness", the shortcomings of the Israelis.

So then how can Farah and persons like him, insist that the world should sponsor this "Israel" in Palestine, simply because God allegedly promised the land of Palestine to this so-called "Israel", when they themselves admit that the "Israelis" could prove unworthy of God's supposed promise?

Even according to Farah's own superstitious self, the promise might not come true because of "Israeli" shortcomings and "unworthiness". Yet Farah insists on ignoring the role of such shortcomings and "unworthiness" in the "Israeli" Jewish national life in his stubborn advocacy of the idea that we must sponsor this "Israel" in Palestine because according to Farah God promised Palestine to this "Israel".

If indeed the situation is that this land that is promised to "Israel" might not go to "Israel" because of "Israel"'s sins, then how can the so called promise of the land to "Israel", be the basis for such unconditional manic support for the establishment of this so-called "Israel" in Palestine?

This people that calls itself "Israel", regarding which Farah says we are obligated by Biblical scripture to establish them in Palestine, has been in the eyes of many astute observers been guilty of "unworthiness" not just during its most recent war this year, but for many hundreds of years.

In attacking the Israeli government, Farah sets forth the notion that a nation should always keep fighting for the goal it set out to accomplish no matter how the fighting goes. This is of course irrational. Often-times in history, nations have improved their position be giving up on projects that were not working out.

Farah declares that allowing the enemy to gain a victory constitutes treason. This again is an irrational contradiction of common sense and the lessons of history. Nations have often improved their position by allowing the enemy a victory.

Farah avers that since "Israel" is less secure now than it would have been had it kept fighting, therefore of course Israel should keep fighting. Yet again, an irrational contradiction of common sense and the lessons of history. A nation can do things that improve its security, but that produce a lower cost-benefit than alternative actions would.

Methinks Farah is one of many conservative commentators who writes too much, and thinks and listens to little. Plus he is a rude and agnry man, as if he was ignorant that the Christianity that he professes condemns rudeness and anger.



@2006 David Virgil Hobbs

Incompetence(?) of the Jews Who Rule(?) the USA

As evinced in the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah War

The word is, that former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon once declared to the Israelis, that they should stop worrying about what the USA will do in response to what Israel does--Sharon told them that Sharon and the Jewish people control the USA.

If the Jewish people do indeed control the USA, and also control their homeland Israel, although one might accept that they would be lax in their management of the USA, one would still expect them to show a high degree of competence in their management of Israel. If the Jewish management of Israel showed itself to be incompetent in its management of Israel, it would be reasonable to suspect that therefore they are too incompetent to manage the USA.

My opinion now is that, fundamentally, three types of power combine and compete to control nations. There is the military power, the tanks, the airplanes, the ships, the helicopters, the missiles, and the men who operate such equipment; there is the money power--the aggregate income and wealth of persons who have enough time and money and energy to use their money in the pursuit of power over the government of a nation; and there is the spy-agency power, which is similar to the military power, but whose method of operation is relatively invisible.

The financial power is broken into competing subgroups--this financial power, that financial power. Same for the spy and military powers. Situations vary but in some important cases: the financial power is unable to exercise control over the nation without the use of a sword (the military power) or the dagger (the spy power), but can control the nation if it combines with a sword or dagger; a financial power which combines most effectively with a spy power dagger obtains control over the nation; the financial power which has infiltrated the spy powers attached to competing financial powers while at the same time preventing competing financial powers from infiltrating the spy power attached to itself, wins the competition for who shall control the nation.

Thus I find it difficult to dismiss what Sharon "boasted" to his people, as "mere boasting"; and due to the mismanagement of Israel the Jews have displayed in the 2006 Lebanon Hezbollah War, I wonder whether the Jewish people are competent enough to manage the USA. The Israeli Merkava Mk 3 tank was introduced in 1990; the Merkava Mk 4 was introduced in 2004; yet at least dozens of Merkava tanks, were damaged or destroyed by Hezbollah using an anti-tank weapon that has been available since the late 1980s. This is competence?

The Israelis for all their technological sophistication, were taken by surprise by even the mere existence of Hezbollah's network of tunnels and bunkers, which was based on Viet Cong methods used 40 years ago; they did not know where the bunkers and tunnels were or that they even existed. This is competence?

The Israelis did not possess the combination of technology and knowledge that would allow them to overcome a tunnel and bunker defense that was an imitation of the tunnel and bunker defenses used by the Viet Cong against the USA 40 years ago. This is competence?

The mothers of Israeli troops had to hit up their kibbutzes for donations so that things like flak jackets and tourniquets and helmets could be provided to their soldier sons. This is competence?

The Israeli chain of command was in perpetual fierce open disagreement with itself and the troops knew this; as a result of the disagreements the troops were indecisive, of low morale, often senselessly moved to a place away from the place and then back to that same place for no reason. This is competence?

Dozens of Hezbollah fighters repeatedly kept hundreds of Israeli troops pinned down within a few hundred yards of the Israeli border. This is competence?

Going back further in history, the Jewish people have often ended up getting massacred by the hundreds, the thousands, the millions. This is a reason they set up an outpost (Israel) in Palestine. Thomas Sowell has far as I can tell recently declared that US foreign policy should be founded on a philanthropic desire to set right injustices one foreign power committed against another foreign power, for example what the Palestinian "bad guys" did to the Jewish "good guys" in Palestine. The fact remains, that the Jews having often been massacred, is not a sign of Jewish competence. It might be true that the outsiders are wrong to massacre an ethnic group--but this does not mean that the massacred ethnic group evinced competence by ending up being massacred.

The level of competence of a group managing a nation, the level of competence of the managed nationals, is related to cultural traits. The 2006 Israel Lebanon war and other events in Jewish history, cast doubt upon ideas that have in the past been held with almost religious certainty, such as the idea that the cultural traits of ethnic-superiority-complex, materialism, atheism and agnosticism which seem to be relatively common in the Jewish population produce competence in national affairs.

Israel had 20 years to get its Merkava tanks embellished to the point where they could withstand the ancient anti-tank missiles that damaged and destroyed them in large numbers in the 2006 Lebanon Israel war. How is it that the tanks were not upgraded, through modification or through assembly line changes? How is it that the tanks were not replaced with some new approach to battle?

Might it be that when the prevalence of hyper-proud, selfish, materialistic, atheistic men in a society becomes common, the net result, is that you get results such as tanks inexcusably unfit to face ancient anti-tank missiles, because the rulers of the society's military-industrial complex pursued bribes rather than the strength of their nation?



@2006 David Virgil Hobbs

Americans have replaced obedience with their own machinations

"And he said, Abba, Father, all things are possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what thou wilt."

Seems to me, that the people of the USA for at least 30 years now, have been inclined to substitute reasoned obedience to God's scriptural commands when approaching a situation, with manipulative selfish disobedience to God's commands. I see this in their approach to personal relationships, and also in their approach to matters such as the growing strength of Islamic nations. For example, many women in the USA, when they meet a man who they wish to marry, will attempt to sabotage the man so as to render him dependent upon them and easily bossed about by them. Whereas if such women were obedient to scriptures that we can semi-psychically tell are inspired, these women would do unto these men, as they would like these men to do unto them, treat them with civility and friendliness and not attempt to sabotage them so as to control them.

The obedient to inspired scripture approach would be to be a helpful friend to such men and let the chips fall where they may. Instead, such women, without any trace of resignation to God's will (I realize persons can be too resigned to the so-called "God's will") in their attempts to force their own will upon the world, disregard scriptural advice. Looking at the post-WW-II approach of the USA to Islamic nations, the USA could have in this time attempted to do God's will based on scriptures we can when we are in an inspired state of mind sense are inspired (the Word of God is God says scripture). For example there have been times in the years since World War Two when the USA was indeed very rich and certain Muslim nations were indeed very poor, and the Muslim nations were experiencing high death and disease rates because they could not afford to implement even inexpensive public health measures. The USA public and private sectors without harming themselves could have helped out with the public health problems--this would have been in keeping with a reasonable interpretation re what scriptures should mean to modern man and thousands of lives could have been saved using a fraction of what the USA spends on tobacco or soda pop or pornography--but instead the USA provided no help dealing with such public health problems. Instead, (IMHO as of now blah blah blah) the USA chose to implement policies that disregarded the advice of inspired scripture, policies of aggression or neglect. The USA could have said to itself, let's just follow God's advice in dealing with these nations and what will be will be, because God rewards the nation the people the individual who does His will; instead they attempted to bend the world to their own will, forgetting about God's will, through the implementation of policies that contradicted a reasoned interpretation of inspired scripture.

True Christianity is not necessarily the same thing as a medieval Crusader's interpretation of Christianity, or a non-Christians confused interpretation of some Christian's befuddled interpretation of Christianity. Doing God's will with regards to Muslim nations, is not the same thing as aping the behaviour of mostly illiterate Crusaders of hundreds of years ago.

The USA's policy with regards to Muslim nations (IMHO blah blah blah), has been to establish a hated Jewish outpost in Muslim territory, as part and parcel of a general supposedly pre-emptive aggression against Muslim nations, designed to seize resources, resources that incredibly, can be replaced by slightly more expensive domestic alternatives from Muslim nations. Where, I wonder, does inspired scripture declare, that the USA of the 20th-21st centuries should do this?

If the USA were to have followed the scriptural model in dealing with Muslim nations, it would (IMHO as of now blah blah blah) have approached the Muslim nations peaceably, like a teacher approaches a student, or like a philanthropist aiding a needy person. Scripture says to teach the nations, to do good to all men, not just to do good to Christian men. Teachers do not abuse students because such generates rebellion and a failure to learn. Based on the scriptural model, the USA would have attempted to promote amongst Muslim nations, governments tolerant of Christianity that were at least behaviorally if not in doctrine, Christian with regards to their conduct vis a vis their subjects. Instead the USA has behaved in unchristian ways designed to promote the finances of special interests.

Elements in the USA have in effect turned their own befuddled interpretations of hard to understand mystically symbolic religious scriptures into a God, as if God was merely a book and a human's interpretation of a book, as if God had no mind--and they have ignored the question of what is in God's mind with regards to the interpretation of scripture. If God is simply a southern preacher's opinion regarding what a difficult to understand scripture means, then there would be many Gods--but Christians pride themselves on their monotheism.

Judging from scripture, the way for the USA to deal with relatively speaking growing weakness in itself and its allies due to the economic and population growth in Muslim nations, would be to peaceably promote and use alternatives to resources sold by Muslim nations, while at the same time building up its own economy/defenses and the economy/defenses of its allies.

Such might include: a robust ability to detect who is behind a given explosion of a bomb; making it difficult for would be bombers to explode bombs without the USA knowing who did it; making it difficult for aggressors to enter the nation and cause mischief; the whole world saw in the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict, how defensive systems such as bunkers and tunnels, can defeat offensive systems such as aircraft dropping bombs.

It all reminds me of the story of Adam and Eve. Prior to the corruption introduced by the serpent, Adam and Eve were obedient to God. But they chose to replace this obedience, with their own human calculations, the ability reason that the serpent promised to them--likewise (IMHO as of now blah blah blah) the people of the USA, have in various ways chosen to replace a reasonable attempt to apply inspired scripture to various situations, and a passion for seeing God's will done on earth, with attempts to force their own will to be done on earth through the use of methods that contradict the teachings of inspired scriptures.



@2006 David Virgil Hobbs

Modern Treatment of Addicts & Mentally Ill Incompetently & Disastrously Loses Human Souls to Hell

The end result of the war on drugs, combined with govt meddling in who has to learn what where in order to practice medicine, combined with laws that favor people who sue treatment facilities over the treatment facilities that are sued, is (IMHO as of now etc) that souls that could be saved are lost and end up suffering horrible tortures, such as becoming like unto insects frying alive in a frying pan forever, all the while knowing that their torture will continue forever. Meanwhile much of the medical world continues in errors such as atheism, predestinarianism, determinism, everything that happens is God's will-ism, denial of free-will-ism, what a person does does not effect his spiritual condition-ism.

I realize that putting resources into helping the damned as opposed to helping the saved can be a form of disorder--but this kind of loss of souls from a certain point of view could be more important than say a medical care program that extends the average lifespan by five years or a government initiative that increases a corporation's stock value by ten percent. A certain fraction of the mentally ill are not damned. What we are essentially talking about is not a choice between putting resources into helping the saved vs helping save the damned, but rather a choice between expending resources used to deal with "mental illness" in one way or in another way.

The mental health and drug addiction treatment programs that we now have, be they administered by one MD or an entire staff, be they inpatient or outpatient are basically, as far a I can tell, a failure. When you compare the mentally ill and addicts who do not go through these programs to those who do, the difference is almost insignificant. People end up being "cured" to "some extent" for a limited amount of time. And the treatment programs pay not attention to the whole question of changing a person from being someone who is damned, into being someone who is saved.

I find it monstrous, that the somnolescently fat and happy government coddled and protected medical profession (they enjoy an artificially low supply/demand ratio as only they are allowed to practice medicine) never bats an eye over this tragic problem--the sheer disastrous incompetence of modern psychiatry wwhen it comes to the important task of changing people from people who are damned into people who are saved.

The so called war on drugs, is actually a war on certain drugs with a bias against natural "drugs", which has created an imbalance in society that harms society similarly to the way biological imbalances harm ecologies, in that the (mostly natural) substances that tend to get people off the path to hell on to the path to heaven are banned, while (mostly synthetic) drugs that tend to have no effect or make things worse in terms of the patient's spiritual condition are promoted.

It is monstrous in the extreme, that special interests should promote substances and ideas and behaviors that tend to get people into hell, simply because they believe that people being hellish will result in greater profits for them than people being heavenly will.

Modern psychiatry is obsessed with basically getting patients high on this or that pill, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. This approach contradicts and defies what people through common sense and experience already know, that being high on something 24 hours a day 7 days a week usually leads not upwards but downwards.

There are certain types of patients who now are treated with small-talk sessions with psychiatrists, and with currently psychopharmacological substances, who (IMHO) could benefit through programs in which patients are forced/encouraged/bribed/etc to: engage in some aerobic exercise such as jogging regularly; study the Bible and pray regularly; live a life featuring mental and physical chastity (no porn masturbation fornication etc etc); experience quiet (minimal radio TV recorded audio/video); consume hashish or some similar religiously psycho-active substance at regular intervals as opposed to constantly (every 4 days?); engage in spirit-friendly activities such as Bible reading, sports, walks visiting great cathedrals etc.

I realize society has become ridiculously favoritist in the sense of favoring the "disabled" over the "abled" but what I advocate is that the progams of the type I describe in the above paragraph, be open to both the "sane" and the "insane" and both the "disabled" and the "abled".



@2006 David Virgil Hobbs

Humans Banding Together in Self Destructive Profit Maximization Groups

The USA today reminds me of:

20 men on island named Yahweh Bay (population 100), banded together to form the "Faifful Trest Co'po'ashun". This Corporation was strictly bound by law, to maximize profits for the 20 shareholders who were all inhabitants of Yahweh Bay. And so the "Faifful Trest Co'po'ashun " faithfully went about the job of maximizing profits for its 20 shareholders.

"Faifful Trest Co'po'ashun" succeeded in producing $10,000 of profits per year for each of its shareholders. "Faifful Trest Co'po'ashun", strictly adhered to its legal mandate to maximize profits. It dutifully bribed govt officials; it grimly assassinated political opponents (three of the wives of the stockholders of "Faifful Trest" died in one of these assassinations); it corrupted the youth of the island to make sure that they would buy Faithful Trust's products and not get in the way of Faithful Trust's attempts to maximize profits; it devastated the island's food supply because the food supply got in the way of profits; it poisoned the air and the water and the land on the island because being ecologically harmless reduced profits and left the island's inhabitants healthy enough to protest against the operations of Faithful Trust Corporation; it got the island entangled in military altercations because the fighting enhanced profits and kept the island's inhabitants too busy to bother with legislating against "Faifful Trest Co'po'ashun" (in the process seven of the children of the stockholders of "Faifful Trest Co'po'ashun" were killed in various expeditions); it made sure that the doctrines of the Church on the island were corrupted to a sort of pagan/heretical hedonism so that the congregation of the Church and the rest of the islanders would not do silly ethical things that got in the way of profits.

Problem is that in the process of faithfully in a trustworthy manner strictly adhering to its legal mandate to maximize profits, "Faifful Trest Co'po'ashun" set in motion events that reduced the on-the-job non-Faifful-Trest earned income of its 20 shareholders from $100,000 per year before Faifful Trust Corporation was legally constituted, to $5,000 per year after this "Faifful Trest Co'po'ashun" became operational, because it the "Faifful Trest Co'po'ashun" strictly adhered to its legal mandate to maximize profits, and to hell with how much money people earn in their jobs.

Thus the total average earned on the job income of the 20 shareholders of "Faifful Trest Co'po'ashun" fell from $100,000 to $15,000. Faithful Trust also got the island heavily indebted to foreigners (even though it used to be a creditor), and into a huge trade deficit, as a result of which with the passage of time the wealth and the income of the islanders and their ability to buy the things made by Faithful Trust declined to lower and lower levels along with the profits of "Faifful Trest". This had to do with the fact that lawyers and judges were inclined to see any concern for the long term on the part of the management of "Faifful Trest", as an illegal dereliction of the duty to maximize profits.

In the end due to the efforts of the Faifful Trest Corporation, 30 percent of the islanders on Yahweh Bay and 20 percent of the 20 stockholders ended up poisoned to death; 25 percent of the Yahweh Bay islanders and 10 percent of the stockholders ended up starved to death; 30 percent of the islanders and 10 percent of the 20 stockholders ended up as slaves; 15 percent of the islanders and 60 percent of the 20 stockholders ended up killed by a bomb dropped by a neighboring island on Yahweh Bay; most of the Yahweh Bay Islanders and Faifful Trest Corporation stockholders ended up dead and the rest as slaves; and 99 of the 100 inhabitants of Yahweh Bay ended up in hell while one was sentenced to six million years in Purgatory.



@2006 David Virgil Hobbs

Anti-establishment Critics are Like Myopic Kids Obsessed with Playing Cops and Robbers

There are people who are obsessed with scandal and the persecution of persons linked to scandal. This can make no sense. What about things more important than scandals? What about issue X, whose importance on 0-100 scale, is 90--how can you trash the man tainted by scandal who is on your side with issue X, while you glorify the man who is on the wrong side with issue X, who is "pure" regarding scandal, when the scandal is on the 0-100 scale of importance 25 only?

When the most powerful elements in society are scandalous how can you expect absolute purity from anyone? Seems to me that the anti-US-govt-establishment critics, are like children obsessed with playing cops and robber with regards to this or that crime. As a matter of fact hiding behind the hip sophisticated website design and the bylines, you actually do find people who are nothing but teenagers or a few years beyond teenager, but who carry on as if they were as wise as King Solomon himself.

With experience people come to realize that when it comes to the government administration of large territories, it can be a big mistake, to get obsessed with any one particular criminal incident. The fact of the matter is that adults who administer and rule territories, realize that you could have a good year featuring a gang getting away with a major crime, and you could have a bad year featuring a gang being caught prosecuted and convicted. Sometimes crooks get away with something, still life goes on, the society succeeds and progresses. What is more important than throwing the crook in jail is preventing the crime the crook committed from being committed again.

It is childish to suppose, that the only threat to the nation or to the world, is the criminal/scandal threat. All kinds of foolish non-criminal things are done by citizens and governments all the time. These foolish non-criminal acts end up being the indirect cause of criminal harmful acts.

It is childish, to be incapable of conceiving of the possibility, that there could exist men who are criminal, who excel men who are not criminal, due to: the fact that these criminal men, do positive things that are not criminal; the fact that these criminal men refrain from doing negative non-criminal things; the fact that the inferior non-criminal men do non-criminal things that are negative; the fact that the inferior non-criminal men fail to do non-criminal things that are positive; the fact that the superior criminal men do criminal things that are positive; and the fact that the inferior non-criminal men fail to do criminal things that are positive.

The obsession with the persecution of criminal conduct, invariably leads to a de-emphasis, devaluation, and underappreciation of: criminal men doing positive non-criminal things; criminal men avoiding non-criminal but negative acts; criminal men committing criminal acts that are positive.

The obsession with the persecution of criminal conduct, invariably leads to a lack of emphasis being placed on aspects of human conduct such as the harm caused by non-criminal men through; their negative non-criminal acts; their failure to engage in positive non-criminal acts; their failure to engage in positive criminal acts.

Alot of the anti-establishment critics remind me of kids playing cops and robbers, kids with an excessive self esteem based on their myopic obsession with the prosecution of criminals.

It can get to the point in the real world, where a leader can accomplish nothing, because he has nobody left to work with or to praise, because his ethical standards are so strict that everyone in his eyes is merely a crook. Realistically speaking, we have to realize that all men are sinners, lots of men are criminal, but that there are different levels of sin and crime. We have to realize that the negative side of the accounts is not the only side, that humans have a positive side that expresses itself through virtuous and admirable conduct.

Ask any Mogul ruler, Akbar, Jahangir, Babar, Shah Jahan, you name it. The way the real world is, sometimes a ruler and his nation are better off if the ruler just makes peace with a powerful criminal group that has committed some offense against his nation. Nations are constantly having criminal acts perpetrated against them, nations are constantly exposed to treachery, many of the crimes committed against individuals can be committed against nations and often are committed against nations. Nations commit crimes against other nations. The whole point of punishment of criminals is to insure a better future. When the punisment of criminals obstructs a better future, it becomes counterproductive.

The myopic obsession of the anti-establishment kids with playing cops and robbers, only serves to further the interests of the elements these anti-establishment kids fear and loathe. One wonders whether the establishment therefore deliberately encourages the cops and robbers myopia. One wonders how these conspiracy-busting Sherlock-Holmesish kiddos fail to suspect that their own ineffective myopia could be a result of shady cleverness on the part of the establishment they despise.



@2006 David Virgil Hobbs

NRO excuses for war can be used to justify anything

Here is my translation of the latest NRO Editorial, "The Current Battle" (August 8 2006) byline "the ( NRO) Editors" ( http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OGVjYmUwM2RkMGM4NjY1NzUwNTE0NjgxZGFhZTA3Y2U= ):

HEZBOLLAH MUST BE DEFEATED OR IT WILL BULLY ARAB GOVTS AND UN PEACEKEEPERS AND SYRIA AND IRAN WILL BE STRONG

HEZBOLLAH MUST BE DISARMED OR PUSHED BACK OR FORCED INTO UNILATERAL CEASEFIRE AND ISRAELI OCCUPATION

THIS IS A BATTLE IN A WAR WITH ISLAM FOR CONTROL OF THE MIDEAST

(END OF TRANSLATION)

I don't get it. There are tons of powers in the world, who bully the governments of other nations and who push UN peacekeepers around, and still we do not insist on disarming them by force of arms.

There are tons of nations out there that we could weaken by doing something malicious, but still we do not go out and do these malicious things.

The world is filled with these situations where nations share borders over which rockets have been shot, but still, we do not demand that one of the sides in the conflict, be disarmed or pushed back from its own border or subjected to a unilateral cease-fire under the guns of the invaders from across the border.

The world is filled with moderately strong powers that are getting stronger and that have a history of mischief, yet we do not embark on bloody and expensive attempts to spank them into submission.

Throughout history, you can find examples of nations that: built up their strength, without getting involved in military expeditions designed to suppress foreign armed groups that bully foreign governments; that built up their strength, while refraining from engaging in military adventures simply because these adventures weakened competing nations; that built up their strength, without getting involved in disarming one of two nations sharing a border that were in the habit of lobbing projectiles over this border at each other; and that built up their strength while refraining from attempting to conquer moderately powerful and important foreign lands that happened to be getting stronger.

Throughout history, you can find examples of nations that: weakened their own position vis a vis the other nations of the world by: attempting to suppress foreign armed groups that bullied foreign governments; engaging in military aggression against foreign nations simply because these aggressions weakened foreign nations; attempting to disarm or force into retreat one of two foreign nations involved in a border conflict; and attempting to conquer moderately powerful and important foreign lands that were growing stronger.

This kind of ideology that NRO is advocating, is a war-like ideology that can be used to justify anything: almost any war can be justified on the grounds that it weakens foreign bullies who bully foreign governments; or on the grounds that it weakens foreign governments; or on the grounds that it will lead to the disarmament of a foreign government; or on the grounds that it will wrest power over a chunk of territory from those who heretofore have been in posession of it.



@2006 David Virgil Hobbs

911 Whodunit Mentality Distracts from Important Problems and Solutions

The 911 Conspiracy Theorists have become a mainstream force, now that a mainstream polling organization has reported that a third of Americans reject the government's version of events on 911.

What I now see, is a general weakness in terms of the critiques of the government that are being made, and I see this weakness as contributing to weakness in government. How can a nation have a good government, when the criticisms of the government are lacking in quality? I believe the criticism of the government lacks quality because it has become distracted by the question of exactly what happened on 911.

There are various possibilities in the eyes of various observers re 911.

Opinion 1: Some think that the US government, was dishonorably involved in 911, in that it either assisted in the attacks or allowed the attackers to succeed.

Opinion 2: Others think that 911 was perpetrated by approximately speaking the type of of people the US government says it was perpetrated by, without any help from their enemies the US govt.

Opinion 3: Then you have people who think that the US government did something clever and James Bond like by allowing terrorists to succeed and or assisting in the attacks, because such resulted in a patriotic fervor for war that in the minds of such observers is unfortunately lacking in the public in democracies at times when it is needed.

The US govt policy subsequent to 911 has been significantly defective in certain ways, whether or not you adhere to opinion 1 or opinion 2.

The US govt policy subsequent to 911 has also been significantly defective in certain ways, whether or not you adhere to opinion 1, opinion 2, or also even opinion 3.

Therefore high quality critiques of US govt policies, would of course not neglect those govt policies that have been defective whether or not your opinion is 1 or 2, and those govt policies that have been defective whether or not your opinion is 1, 2, or 3.

Both persons who hold opinion 1 and persons who hold opinion 2 could agree on what the best solution for improving a US govt policy might be.

Persons who hold opinion 1, persons who hold opinion 2, and also even persons who hold opinion 3 could agree that a given solution is the best solution for a given weakness in US government.

High quality critiques of US govt policy, would never ignore such solutions that all these different types of people could agree on.

It is incorrect to say that simply because someone in my nation holds some opinion I do not agree with, therefore my nation should self-destruct.



@2006 David Virgil Hobbs

Attempts to simultaneously serve National Security and also Special Interests, Lead to National Security Failures

My belief as of now, is that the level of damage caused to the USA and to the world by the USA national security policies, can be reduced dramatically, if the USA can accomplish the simple task, of changing over to a mindset in which government departments involved in USA national security activities, serve the national and secondarily the international security interests, as opposed to the current situation, featuring such departments attempting to simultaneously serve the national security interest, the energy industries special interest, the armaments industry special interest, the pet foreign nation special interest and the who knows what other special interest.

Suppose given government policies such as policy X and policy Z, can be given a numerical score Y, on a scale of 1 to 10, the Y score describing how much the policy benefits a given interest, with a 1 score meaning the policy has a dramatic negative effect on the given interest and a 10 score meaning the policy has a dramatic positive effect for the given interest.

Suppose policy X is scored as a 10 for national security interest, a 5 for the energy industry special interest, a 5 for the Armaments industry special interest, and a 5 for the pet foreign state special interest--total score: 25. Suppose policy Z is scored as 5 for the national security interest, 7 for the energy industry special interest, 7 for the armaments industry special interest, and 7 for the pet foreign state special interest--total score, 26.

In such a case when the government policies attempt to serve all these regular and special interests simultaneously, the policy X which is a 10 for national security scores at only 25 overall, while the policy Z, which scores a 5 on national security interest, scores a 26 overall, with the hypothetical result that policy Z, the policy that does nothing for national security, is instituted whereas policy X which scored 10 from the national security interest is not implemented.

It is incredible that a nation's adults can childishly descend to this level of being unable to put the national interest ahead of the special interest that they have financial interests in.

Philosophies that promote atheism, selfishness, and irresponsibility encourage persons with a financial stake in special interests to perpetually place their special interest on a pedestal above the national interest. Likewise government polices that encourage this kind of special interest treachery and selfishness, such as laws that demand that corporations obsess over their own short term profits, encourage the same.

A nation composed of adults should be able to solve the problem of special interest selfishness interfering with the national interest.

National security is a tough enough problem without adding in the complication wherein the government simultaneously tries to please special interests and serve the national security interest.

One of these days the special interest fat-cats are going to wake up to discover that they have ruined themselves and their own families, through their obsession with the promotion of their pet special interests as opposed to the national interest.

The world and the art of military science is in a constant state of flux due to influences such as advances in technology, changes in the world distribution of wealth, changes in world population compositions, changes in the conduct and personality of human beings, changes in terms of who has what military hardware, and migrations of persons.

A nation that gets its self set up to fight the DEF type of war, that plunges into a X type of war to satisfy the special interests that have been set up to benefit from an X type of war, will fall if it therefore plunges into an X type of war in a world that has changed to the point where the alternative Y approach is the reasonable approach as opposed to the X type of war.



@2006 David Virgil Hobbs

Fundamentalists Put Their Own Personal Interpretation of Scripture on a Pedestal Above the Interpretation God's Mind Declares Correct for Modern Man

It boggles the mind how so-called fundamentalists, put their own personal interpretation of extremely hard to understand Biblical scriptures, on a pedestal above what is in God's mind regarding what is in those scriptures.

Although these so-called "Christian fundamentalists" usually posess no special gift of insight regarding the true meaning of scriptures, nevertheless they deify their own personal opinion regarding what a scripture means, as opposed to what is in God's mind, God's opinion, regarding what a scripture should mean to a 21st century person.

If these fundamentalists were truly fundamentalist, they would hold such a high regard for what is in God's mind regarding the correct modern meaning of a scripture, that they would never dare to put their own pot-bellied opinions on a pedestal above what is in God's mind regarding the meaning of a scripture.

The fact of the matter is that even the wisest persons sometimes, even often, do not know what the true meaning of a scripture is.

Such wise persons, do not adhere to the nutty idea, that it is impossible for a person to live a godly life without understanding what the true meaning of every scripture is.

Christ praised the children and the poor who were usually illiterate. Some churches got this letter or gospel other churches were given different letters and gospels. Some crowds heard certain words of Christ other crowds heard other words of Christ. Most of the words of Christ were never even recorded in scripture. Certain teachings were at certain times witheld from the people because the time was not ripe the people were not ready for them, or, the people were in a state such that they would rebel against the prophet if they were given certain teachings that were more than they could bear. An understanding of certain of the scriptures is useful for certain persons in certain positions but not for everyone.

Thus there is ample reason to suppose, that a person could live a godly life without understanding the exact meaning of every religious scripture.

Wisely religious persons, understand that when a scripture that is not understood is encountered, the smart thing to do in the absence of an understanding of the meaning of the scripture, is to rely on the powers of reasoning and on the scriptures whose meanings are understood.

Wisely religious persons, understand, that the mentality of the typical average human being, which is the mentality that exists in many "fundamentalist Christians", is a mentality that is not up to the difficult task of understanding the true meaning of hard to understand scriptures. They understand, that a certain kind of spiritual gift from God is required to understand the meaning of these scriptures. They do not pretend, that the average or common state of mind is adequate to understand the difficult scriptures. They do not presume, that it is proper to accord a given human interpretation of scripture importance greater than the meaning of the scripture that exists in the mind of God, simply because some loud wealthy obese preacher in a three piece suit, has declared that so and so is the meaning of the scripture in question.

@2006 David Virgil Hobbs

Logical Inadequacies in NRO Support for Continued War on Hezbollah in Lebanon

What the National Review Online or NRO is saying (once you boil down the excess and disordered verbiage a few times) at

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YzUyNGNiMzIxOGMzZmJiMmFlODIwNTcxNmFjNTViZDM=

in their article "No Winning Strategy" signed by "The Editors" is:

"We cannot agree to a simple cease-fire with Hezbollah. We will be defeated if we dont attack Hezbollah. Attacking Hezbollah weakens Hezbollah and Hezbollah's sponsors, and puts pressure on Hezbollah and Hezbollah's sponsors to surrender".

The problem with their argument is that in war, any conceivable attack on the enemy will weaken the enemy and increase the pressure on them to surrender. Since this is always true, it is nonsense to say, that an enemy should be attacked in a given way because such an attack will increase the pressure on the enemy to surrender and weaken him.

The dummest generals know that the mere fact an attack on the enemy will weaken the enemy and increase the pressure on him to surrender, does not indicate that such an attack is a good idea.

The questions are: is the given attack on the enemy going to produce a greater benefit-cost outcome than other possible military moves? Does the damage the attack will cause to the enemy outweigh the damage the attack will cause to the attacker?

For the USA, Israel is like an extended outpost whose existence stirs up trouble with foreign nations. The National Review Online article for all its verbosity does not explain why the USA should go to such lengths maintaining beleaguered extended far-off outposts such as its Green Zone in Baghdad or Israel.

Often-times in the history of war, militaries have erred by establishing outposts that are too far away from home ("A Bridge Too Far") or by fighting too hard to defend such outposts. Even the dummest generals, are aware of how retreats and surrenders can produce strategic advantage. Once an outpost is surrendered, there is no longer any need to pour resources into it. Throughout history, militaries have gained advantage by surrendering or retreating from distant outposts. It is irrational to say that the proper response is of course to always pour resources into defending the outpost.

In their argument the NRO editors do not bother with explaining why the USA should maintain outposts in Israel and in the Green Zone in Baghdad. A nation's physical and economic security is not necessarily enhanced by expensive attempts to invade and institute docile governments in far-off lands. Throughout history, nations have strenghened themselves by doing things other than invading and attempting to emasculate far-off lands. Throughout history, nations have damaged their own physical and economic security by attempting to invade and emasculate far-off lands.

The NRO editors do not explain how the physical and economic security of he USA is enhanced by attempts to invade foreign nations to conquer resources which from the USA's indivudal perspective are obsolete and unnecessary. Throughout history, nations have enhanced their own security by doing things other than attempting to conquer resources in other nations. Throughout history nations have damaged their own security by attempting to conquer resources from other nations. If nations have damaged themselves by attempting to conquer resources that are not obsolete, how much more foolish are attempts to steal resources which from the would-be conqueror's perspective are obsolete and unnecessary?

The NRO editors do not explain, why the USA would be better off engaging in expensive wars to attempt to conquer foreign resources, when as an alternative slightly more expensive substitute domestic resources are available. The greater expense of the domestic resources is compensated for by: the lower transportation to point of consumption cost of the resource; the spinoff effects generated as domestic producers spend the money they obtain from the sale of the resources,and those receiving this spending in turn spend it on others etc etc; the much less extended and vulnerable line of supply for the resource; the huge savings on the cost of attempts to invade and conquer far-off lands.

The NRO editors do not explain, why the USA should turn nations that could once have been friendly rivals, into bitter enemies, by using far-off outposts to invade them and attempt to conquer their resources and bully them into docility. If the best that can be hoped for with a group of foreign nations is a friendly rivalry, then the best course of action to contain the friendly rivals is usually not to squander precious resources invading these friendly rivals and turning them into bitter rivals; it is more expensive to invade a far off nation than it is to defend against an invasion from a far-off nation. Rather the best course of action is to build up third parties other than home nation or the rival group of nations, build up the home nation's presence in the third party nations, so as to inhibit the possibility that the rivals will be able to become overwhelmingly strong by conquering the third party nations.


@2006 David Virgil Hobbs