Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
This Is Not God/science Post... A Forewarning...

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Murat Bilginer on February 24, 2003 16:04:31 UTC

you mean history of the human world?
well ill try

cause- the most intense issue as ive percieved amongst a people, and a sustained inter-cultural conflict is invariably the percieved threat of the security of progenation and belief systems as the two usually go hand in hand. most people would not accept the imposition of another's way of life upon themselves and especially their children, nor the displacement of their lives, homes, ideals, land, etc. it is this conviction that usually propogates war that is not based in some sort of defamation. feud type conflict is a response to such defamation and as such a cause/effect as one. i dont think this would require support but anyway.
i.e.(and most accessibly at present) palestinian conflict, began from displacement of all above examples and competition of ideals, subjugation and threat to future propogation, humiliation without reparation. on both sides, there are those that believe their families and culture would be safe as long as the conflict stops and there are those that do not believe this from their perceptions of their enemies motives and mutual history.
american indian conflict: was never resolved and no revenge has ever been promoted, although the intense feelings of humiliation and wronging have never subsided, they do not feel that their religion/culture is subject to immediate threat, nor would benefit from such action. rather they take action to procure themselves a way of life that is free from the devastation and humiliation that war had caused them and is supportive of proliferation of progeny. but i believe if there are a large enough number amongst them that feel theirway of life or progeny is at risk, then it wouldnt be unreasonable to conclude that they will organize to take defensive and/or vengeful action, to the death.

humiliation and defamation is a very effective, yet subtle way, to induce violence and separation that will ultimately justify action against the violent faction (that rhymed). being from an urban backdrop myself jamaica, queens and paterson, nj, where there was quite a mix of races, ethnicities, etc. i was witness to the type of scenery and mentality low-income people and more importantly children of, were privy to. as there are nodrug addicts and criminals shuffling through the streets in middle class neighborhoods like saddle brook nj, where my family eventually moved to, a much smaller and lower population density, greater cohesion and wants and needs are presented as more obtainable and realistic in a peaceful manner. i would have to conclude that money plays a part in security of the principles mentioned above. legislators were part of the community as were the policing, zoning laws prohibited the extensive placement of weapons stores, liquor stores, fast food, etc. (especially next to schools as the market district was placed far from the school areas), schooling was funded heavily, streets were safe, children were discouraged from loitering in public and high traffic areas. the town WAS the neighborhood, unlike jamaica, paterson, newark (where i lived shortly and visited often). newark had busy intersections without stop signs, known heroin dealers on "their corners", car theft rates topping the nation and mentalities and personnas straight out of a rap video. though this is not the mentality inherent of a certain race or religion, this situation, thanks to mtv and the other purveyors of adolescent media alike, have spread this violent, angry and disastrous way of life (social and political revolt/rebel without a cause) amongst all "types" of people. a true testament to the unity of the human race, unfortunately proven by the more morbid aspects of human nature. and interestingly enough, saddle brook, once an overwhelmingly all anglo-christian town, experienced growth and influx of ethnic and religios minority, thus effecting property values and income levels of people in area. incidentally, the area of newark i was referring to, began to develop, money was being spent to build a stadium, condos, arts center and a myriad of businesses to support consumer needs. the drug dealers were not on their corners, the stop signs went up (except in front of my friend's building, but it was a warehouse anyway) but after 9/11 the development slowed and things were back to normal. there was an accident on the last day i was there, right before my friend went off to the navy, a suv slammed into a honda and flipped over. that was probably the 8th major accident at that intersection without stop sign and yes the suv was stolen and the honda didnt have insurance.
you cannot control people with the truth, you cannot manipulate their actions with niceness and intellectual notions as these things promote thought and rational conclusions, but fear and address to impulse and emotions is the enslavement of the will by the body and mindless cohesion. take for instance this very disturbing line of reasoning i hear from people far far too often. "well, OUR government knows alot more than WE do, THEY have secrets that they cant tell US for national security and WE probably wouldnt understand it because it involves other secrets about OUR national security and the security of THEIR interests overseas, WE have to stand by OUR president because HE know better than US" this rationale is irrational, but its good enough as long as the government promises our security.
truth is truth no matter how you slice it, and forgive my circular reference, but human truth can only be that which humanity as a whole can agree upon, this must make sense in light of ideas such as equality and justice. a persons own preference is that which separates him and should be allowed undoubtedly, but only if it does not impede on the rights of another individual.
u.s. applied policy, since 1776, has consistently broke the constitutions back, in areas of equality of people, ironically the basis of its formation. where rights were handed out in a trickle down theory based on economic and political standing which was somehow the measure of one's humanity. there is plenty of evidence of this from political assassinations, to social oppression based on class, most notably was race. contrary to disneyland, there is still great racial, ethnic and religious tension amongst americans from all sides, these tensions are perpetuated and the peoples are further divided. ultimately, though, its the class system that is actually the dividing mechanism that can lend itself to be manipulated and applied to any idea, i.e. the seesaw media reinforced pop culture battles of the evil white man and the oppressed black THEN the intelligent white to the emotionally unstable black (easy example). this same type of battle exists amongst sexes, age groups, you name it buddy. this ever-increasing modality being "offered' as identity groups" subjects one to further need to define his/herself. our instinct predicts our competitive nature, our need to belong to a "successful or prefered" group that is small enough to sustain, yet large enough to produce benefits; security, significance/superiority/class, guidance and opportunity to pursue own goals within the structure, etc. this system is pyramidical as is the apportioning of rights in lieu.
the tribal mind of early non-produce humanoids is the result of limited resource for satisfaction of needs/wants. with production-oriented humanoid, farmer/herder, humanity gave up tribal competition over resources, as this exchanged the need to take for satisfaction of needs with a need to make for the same. although defense sensibility was always an issue and war systems were still researched and practiced and were apportioned varying amounts of resource and technology, especially among caucasoid peoples. along came the merchant, and introduced money and trade as techniques were shared by all sides all sides began to develop all products, as well people were introduced to new products that were geographically oriented. suddenly access to resources became percievably limited as humanity can percieve "unlimited" possiblities, therefore naturally unlimited needs/wants. take for instance, the needs and wants of the american citizen. thus the war capability was applied to gaining the usual commodities and geographically oriented resources. now you have a reason for sustained war and policing, authoritarian control of an indigenous people and so forth.
our economy is probably the most inefficient and over-inflated in the world, with regards to access of information, techonology and militarily afforded resources (you do realize that gas prices in america are amongst the lowest in the world, partly because of consumption rates, but mostly because of global politics). our national export is consumption of foreign products, entertainment/propaganda of our cultural ideas, military presence, demand for cheap resources and pollution(3% of world pop. produced over 25%, and thats just presently, imagine our inefficient days har har) i.e. our obvious military presence is, well, obvious, our propaganda is in the form of unrealistic representations of american life and attitudes and people, from baywatch to rap to disney. and proof of our reliance on cheap foreign products can be easily procured by flipping over any product in your house and most of what is in your garage.
the moneys that we buy our foreign goods are given to us at interest and backed by almost nothing, by european industrialists and bankers.. the list of names escapes me but here are some of them. rockefeller, kuhn-loeb, lehman, goldman sachs, warburgs. they own the banks that lend the u.s. money to give to us. they also own large shares of the media and energy consortiums. they finance military contractors and just about all industry directly or indirectly as they are the one that distribute monies. the decision was made when, i believe it was the warburgs on behalf of most of the others wrote a letter to then president wilson that "influenced" hime to sign the federal reserve act, i think it was 1913 or 1917, and the war powers act was around then as well. its researchable, this act gave "the fed" the power to distribute and indirectly value the dollar, they are a group of private bankers and a corporation that does business everywhere in the world, not just america. we are charged interest and fees and penalties by this bank on our own money, currently much of the national debt is tht interest compounded. each american owes 23k and rising. the revolutionary war and civil war were motivated by just that issue of the federal control of the people's money. some argue that this act is against the law and every president that did nothing about it is treasonous, but i dont know about that. even reagan had mentioned it in a speech once and was supposedly reprimanded and never said it again. but once again, researchable but i dont know. our relevanve as people is directly reliant as consumers, other than that we really dont excel in any particular area or production, design or manufacturing save for our entertainment and marketing industry.

can anyone deny that anglican culture (as i dont believe the anglican slant to be religious rather cultish) is colonial in its mentality? they see land that has some sort of benefit to them and they devise strategies to control the resources and people of that land. anglican mentality has militaristically(violently) or economically forced its way into every continent on the globe. n.america, australia, india(not a continent but worth mentioning), africa, asia, even antartica just for good measure... spain got a hold of s.america oh well. it seems it always starts with some faction fleeing persecution and settling in an "uncivilized" land then spreading ravanously and eventually overwhelming the indigenous peoples either through sheer number, technological and/or economic prowess which is usually provided by the country they fled, isnt that a hoot? wherever they inhabit, they proclaim their own superiority and for a time, long enough to subdue the binding traditions and practices of that area and enforce their own, reignite old tensions amongst the various tribes to divide them to ultimately subjugate and oppress the peoples. the various methods include all out dessimation of the population, philosophical and political changes that empower puppet leaders and militaristic support of that entity to their own ends. theres also just flat out saturation with cultural products and ideas, but it can be resisted and usually is, it is not an effective method of control, as many have noted of the arabs.
i being of turkish background, do not excuse this type of behavior from turks or any other, as well i dont identify myself as "turkish" im american as i believe, nation is where you live, who you live amongst and who youre directly responsible to. turkey is some country where some of my relatives live, but theyre responsible for their own actions or negligence, but i digress. the arabs as history has proven are the most resilient of those that try and preserve heritage, as well as the anglo-christians of course. it seems where life was the hardest historically and geographically this principled lifestyle and cohesion thereof was the most important for survival of a people, was a prediction of who the hardest people to overcome would be. notice that arabs are the only that notably kill themselves in hopes of revenge. ive known many arabs in my life and they are hot blooded to say the least, but on the contrary to that, they are the most ardent patriots of justice, not of nations. they have no tendencies toward racial or ethnic discrimination, however they do towards th idealistic. those ideasthey percieve to be wrong or unjust to them, are usually not tolerated very well. they are easily provokable in this manner as has been proven throughout history from biblical to ottoman times to now. but i will say they have been gravely wronged by imperialistic dreamers but somehow they remained and influenced their conquerers.. consider that the turkics and huns, conformed to speak arabic and took on islam as their nationalist identity, thus creating the ottoman empire. anglo-imperialists have been in every nation in the middle east, from english intervention in palestine, egypt, jordan to russia in afghanistan and iran and france in northern africa, algeria morocco and couple others i dont remember. there are anglo'national troops and money everywhere on the pretense of protection of a nation from some "rogue" state that was ironically armed and supported at one point by either the us, russia, france or england. rather its the regime that is being supported and no doubt one day it will end up being a rogue state itself and will require anglo troops to invade it and protect ITS neighbors as the us and england are now the police of the world.
this conflict amongst anglo nations within non anglo nations is peculiar to me, it always ends up the same, resources and people are eventually subject to rule by people that opress them and their resources are exploited and the anglo nations reconcile thier own differences without ever exchanging a single bullet with eachother. vietnam, korea, middle east, balkans, cuba. incidentally, kings and such are prohibited by quran, man must rule himself by the "law of the lord". no clergy or other hierarchical entity can take its place, most of what takes place in the middle east is thousands of years old tradition and its innovations of islam, hadith, sunnah interpretations and particular verses as abrogate of other. it is ironically this same corruption of quranic islam that is not only the root of their religious system, but their justice system and political system for if they were truly islamic, they wouldnt be blowing themselves and innocents up, only aggressors, it is ironically the complete opposite thanks to sheiks and clerics that have no power from the quran, rather the tradition. quranic scriptural ethic is a simple, direct, unapologetic credo, where the ummah(community) is responsible for the justice system that implements it and administrative system that upholds it. and for a "free" society, this makes sense, as the more socially responsible a society conducts his or herself the less popular justification a government has to intercede in their social and personal affairs, hence the more power the people have individually and the less centralization of power in any entity. i believe perversion and conflict to merely be a method of installing and justifying authoritarian control and increasing that entities scope of power. crime is a necessary aspect of control of a people with their approval. crime IS perpetuated as one can obviously discern that truly all people of all "types" are basically the same and react similarly to similar situations. by this reasoning, it would not make sense to create and maintain inequitable class systems. furthermore if equality were the priority of any group of people than one could conclude that nation would not have such disparity in communities' opportunities and situations given that everyone has equal opportunity in reality, not just proclamation. one might argue that freedom of speech mixed with a monetary wealth-based capitalist class system is the cause for some of the perpetuation of the disparity in equal opportunit of the classes, but i find it hard to believe that naked celebrities endorsing alcohol and drug use, reckless sexual content, criminal and dangerous behavior, illegal and unethical weapons usage, immoral social and interpersonal behavior, materialism, division amongst classes, violence, objectification of women and children, [insert any vice or irrational irresponsible concept here] within a mass [global] medium targeting 13 year olds and up should be considered free, the cost immeasurable.

our ties with iraq date back to the late 60's and 70's, saddam hussein a secularist and rebellious leader of some ba'ath islamic cult, was supported by u.s. policy and aided by the cia, the same cia that bush sr. was head. we supplied him with anything he needed to fight against the iranian shah who was conveniently backed by ussr. (notice that russia and us hated eachother but never fought against eachother and always using some thrid world non-white country's land and resources to compare weapons) anyway, these two nations battled and saddam won, not the war mind you, but totalitarian power of the largest oil field in the world, some accounts at up to 20% but the accepted figures of 12% of world supply are nice too. now this dictator, that was once friends with the u.s. turned into a manic. the wealthiest nation in the world by resource, is somehow among the poorest by standards of living. not merely because of the sanctions that preserved his oil output. but because he was a maniac. the oil in that country is virtually untouched by comparison to the rest of the world. furthermore this maniac lusts for power, yet he doesnt use his most available and valuable resource. he would rather murder his people, so they dont rise up against him and then invade a neighboring country, kuwait because they have oil and they slant drilled into his territory, (also note that the u.s. diplomat to iraq, i dont know her name but if you dont trust me i can find it, was informed of saddam's plans for the invasion and there was no objection). he invaded even in lieu of the us gov't industry and economic reliance on kuwaiti oil (of which is not huge but still significant), because hes a madman and thought he could mess with a republican president (oil tycoon) and his administration (military contractors, industrialist, israel sympathizers; incidentally the "bush doctrine" is a rewrite of the "wolfowitz doctrine" written during thefirst bush administration, that new world order guy). and now u.s. has been bombing and sanctioning iraq for 12 years non-stop, to which extent only the poorest of the nation suffered, saddam is still in the lap of luxury. everything saddam does, builds the us case for invasion, of a country that we're already in. its impossible to killl saddam because he has doubles and anyway his son is worse, this is the answer to why we dont just "take him out". hes a threat to the world now with about as fearsome an arsenal as nerf co. and forget that an entity who still remains officially unknown attacked america. (as no one has ever offically taken responsiblity as these groups are known to do, it was even denied by bin laden, never been materially proven to be guilty except those documents and tapes [still unoffical] that u.s. found in a car at the airport and in caves that were demolished by 2 ton bombs, pretty resilient tapes. and oddly enough four of the suspects turned up alive somewhere, but whatever)

as of apportioning of blame, i can only state cause. blame implies intent. intent can hardly be the case of our nation. we are a decent people by our own standards, though those standards seem to be thrown about as that is the impact of a media-informed and affected consumer culture. we are impulsive and predictably reactive because people are impulsive and predictably reactive. if i show you a picture of a "sexy" woman, youll become horny. this is the nature of the beast. i can use association techniques to have you react to one brand as more preferrable to another and over stimulation to illicit confusion. this is how we live, in a perpetual gauntlet of strategic association and noise. true blame goes to whoever seeks the result, the government is by all accounts responsible to the entities that get them into office and to the top.
coke and pepsu both spend 400 million dollars a year each on advertising at one point and rc cola spent 40 million, it is proportional to awareness and consumption of the products(i read that 3 years ago, invariably the overall marketing costs have risen). these marketing firms are turning to the field of politics as campaign management, public relations and so on. campaigns are costing millions upon millions, where would a candidate get that money without risk? the same place the money comes from, the corporations/industrialists/bankers/foreign interests who are totally dependant on us policy and legislation. energy, military contracting, money lending, investment, media, "rogue" nations, etc. all provide monies that represent interests that have nothing to do with "the people". the only role of these interest groups having the government in appeasing people is the same role its always played, someone has to do the work and pay the taxes and be accountable for the debt.
drugs come into this country legally, not illegally. i read a study when i was a teenager that stated how absurd it was that drugs were being smuggled into the country, that a tanker would have to bring them and considering people get caught with suit cases, it impossible to sneak a tanker. the distribution process itself would have raised the prices of the product by over 1000%, hardly making it available to those that most frequently use them, of course some of it is smuggled in but the vast majority, to make it the price it is including the levels of distribution would make a gram of pure cocaine ($100 currently),someting like 7 or 8ooo dollars. and this big kick to stop drug use right when pharm companies are producing their own versions. paxil prozac and xanax as well as ritalin and some other new "concentration" drug(amphetamine) that have been proven to be "highly addictive" and have been known to cause depression and is linked with suicide, heart and psychological problems. i guess they really have to make their money back before they get yanked. r&d is expensive. and where is homeland security regarding these threats. all this publicity on how dangerous the u.s. suddenly got with children being kidnapped, snipers, school shootings, fires and of course the threats of terrorism. the cia themselves have said there is no reason to believe that the us is any more danger than it was 5 years ago even with regard to 9/11. this is opportunistic and the opportunities are as prevalent as always. but to that i would add, the risk is greater because of the proclamations of this administration to root out evil around the world and that whole axis of evil thing, this administration single handedlygave n. korea a reason to feel important again. also note that china was mentioned, i dont know if that would make sense to overtly threaten a nation like china for no reason. notice though, not a single american civilian said or caused any of this, not a single one. but the citizenry is resonsible and directly accountabel for it all. senators arent going off to war, congressman arent under threat, they have a shelters under mountains with supplies that could last them until "an undisclosed term as this would endanger their safety" ... heres a tip, you want to make money? invest in pharmaceuticals and open a bomb shelter manufacturing plant, youll make millions overnight, just like the Language Removed that funded bush.
as for integration, this is a by product of despair elsewhere and the promise of freedom and money here and other industrialized and rich nations. as ive said before, the us, britain russia and france had their influence in every region one might call poor or embattled, their corporations and banks made and paid forthe weapons that destroyed lands and people and "lent" the money and technology to rebuild the infrastructure and install media formats, automatic debt and control of information and money in which their is considerable interest.
im not a big believer in nations as ive noticed all the commissions, organizations and systems that interlock interests and the only percievable constants in all of it are the sources of money and weapons.

this is biblical history for the most part by the way, (i can explain how if you want, but as they say, becareful for what you ask for) hahaha sorry to chew your ear'er i mean eye off and i dont presume that this is the absolute truth, its all verifiable with research, but data is not meaning, i hope i came close. incidentally whats your take on the causes and intentions of our "leaders", are you skeptical?

but i tell you what, i believe we can solve the majority of at least our nations problems. accountablity of our government. pork spending, lying, stealing, interest groups.... all of it can be brought into some sort semblance of workability just by accountability. take for instance my speeding ticket, i lied to the judge, the judge told me that she could have sent me to jail and fined me up to 1000 dollars! damn! she was nice though, i paid the ticket and didnt even bother to plea for reduction of points. i believe that if any public speaker uses mass media, or organizes to address more than a certain number of people, than a reporter (similar to a court reporter) should make the address official and bound by laws of libel and such, no more lying to masses to procure or support you own agenda, no more flimsy and one-sided research (like most of what i wrote hehe), no more flat out lying for votes, support, whatever. if a candidate tells the nation hes gonna do something, then it should be duly noted and that man should be held to his word, and real punishment should be given, none of this vice presidential (new president) pardoning Language Removed, you lied you stole you broke the law, youre in trouble. it seems that legislators have more moves than an oily snake. funny that accountability doesnt apply to those that make the law, isnt it? oh as well, if an interest group meets with a legislator about whatever, there should be some regulation of that, i mean, if the government wants to see my emails and listen to my calls, than i want to see theirs. centralized and unaccountable power, sounds like trouble to me. im stubborn like that and i dont believe theres a lower form of life than a liar, except little ones to women... kidding kidding... once again my apologies for the WMD's word of mass dilapidation.

peace

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2021 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins