We, The Innocent Unwilling
Victims, In The Clash Of Civilizations, or more succinctly stated:
The Clash of the World’s Biggest Religions;
Islam and Christianity
Jeff Wismer
September 21, 2006
WE ARE NOT part of
the Coalition of the Willing. When 33%
of the world (2.1 Billion people), and 21% of the world (1.3 Billion people), (http://www.adherents.com/Religions_By_Adherents.html) which
equals 3.4 Billion people or roughly 50% of the world decide that they can no
longer co-exist peacefully because both of them want to have the religious
majority in the world, then we can not help but become unwilling participants
in that struggle. And whenever the leaders
on both sides of the equation say that it’s not about the clash of
civilizations or the feud among religious ideologies, it’s always about the
clash of civilizations and feud among religious ideologies. To use a business & sport’s analogy,
when one says, “It’s not about the money”, or in other words it’s always about
the money. So who’s to blame for
this? We are of course. We voted those people, the Bush
Administration, that make up the 2% of people in the United States that are so
willing to make their ideologies (mostly based on their religious beliefs)
world wide that they are willing to die for it, and of course willing to put
other’s in harm’s way at any cost. So
congratulations to us, for being apathetic, intellectually lazy (or just plain ignorant),
and mired in the “mental state of agency” meaning a person or thing through
which power is exerted or an end is achieved.
It’s true we have no control over what happens in the
Middle East where radical Islam was born, and has spread throughout the
world. It’s almost like they picked up
the Christian playbook of how Christians used violence and intimidation to take
control over people’s hearts and minds.
Well now Christians, like the Bush Administration, have decided to fight
back and are pushing for World War III.
If the Bush administration thought the people would go along with it
again, and that attacking Iran was popular, I’m sure they wouldn’t hesitate. The Bush Administration is patiently waiting
out the storm of Iraq, which gets no media coverage anymore (http://thinkprogress.org/2006/09/21/matthews-against-war/), and
the backlash they received from Hurricane Katrina. The polls have already started rising in Bush’s favor (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-09-18-bush-poll_x.htm), and
it won’t be long before Karl Rove pulls another rabbit out of the hat such as
gay marriage in 2004 (http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Newsmax_Rove_promises_GOP_insiders_October_0921.html). Once they regain their popularity again with
enough of the American public, they can once again go on the offensive. By the way any seats gained by the
democratic party in the November elections will have little to no consequence,
because Bush still have a long time to win back the hearts and minds of
America, and the Republicans he needs to do that won’t be going anywhere after
November. When it comes down to it
Republicans are still a lot better organized and have a lot more money than
democrats do (http://pewresearch.org/social/pack.php?PackID=1). This
leads to the fact that the neo-cons, theo-cons, and christo-crats can easily
exploit their party, and whip up the base which is basically hard line
religious fanatics. The rest of the
moderate republicans don’t matter b/c they are relatively inert, and would
rather see a republican or conservative in power than a liberal. I guess it was always inevitable that the 2%
of religious fanatics in this country would find a way to ruin the government,
and one can say that the liberals are pissed solely because they didn’t think
of it first. Many liberals were to busy
fighting amongst themselves to pay attention to the growing power of the 2%, and
to this day many are still dumbstruck as to the extent of the power the 2%
holds on this country (http://www.indiewire.com/people/2006/05/beyond_the_ideo.html).
In the middle east, it’s obvious how quickly the fanatical
aspect of Islam took control over the region.
Most of the world’s most fanatically geared religions originated in the
deserts (http://members.aol.com/doestar/antichrist.html). The
desert seems to be the perfect gristmill for grinding out the needed
fanaticism, emotion, and discipline needed to spread it’s message throughout
the world like a virus infecting the host.
One of the most well known group of spiritual giants were the desert
fathers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desert_Fathers) and
the desert monks (http://www.sundayschoolcourses.com/monastic/monastic.htm). We can thank both of those spiritual mighty
men and women for producing spiritual gender oppression, non-stop prayer,
fasting, flagellants (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flagellant),
chastity, and celibacy. Basically what
you have in the desert is a breading ground for the type of thinking it takes
to control the human body. In the
desert it’s necessary to control your eating, sexual experiences, discipline,
and mental state of mind in order to survive the harshest of climates where
virtually anything can kill you if one is not careful. So if I was making a recipe for religious
fanaticism, I would had one cup ideology, one cup abstract thinking, one cup
human emotion, two cups harsh climate, and then mix it all and let sit for 100
years until it’s ready to spread throughout the world.
Bush Administration Foreign Policy
It’s no wonder we are in the bind we find ourselves in
today. Most of us really do want peace
in the world, yet we’re constantly being reactive to the problems that surface
rather than proactive. One would think
that if we stopped throwing money into problems that we can never fix, i.e.
convincing an entire region their way of life is wrong, and putting more money
into programs that can actually help the human race, i.e. evolutionary biology,
genetics, NASA, and medicine. One must
wonder why Bush continues to pressure Iran.
The choices are clear: 1. Start World War III with the Middle East by
going into Iran with a military strike, thus cutting ourselves off from Oil in
the Middle East which would instantly send the country into a economic
recession, or 2. Let Iran become a sovereign nation and develop nuclear power
and have those weapons which we have no problems with India and Pakistan
have. What’s the difference between
Iran having nuclear bombs then South Korea, Pakistan, or India? The difference is the United States will no
longer be able to pressure Iran into caving into international demands and Iran
would instantly become a sovereign nation b/c the United States would not dare
go into a country that had nuclear weapons at their disposal. The bigger ideological problem is that you
have a country with Iran, that the 2% have controlled that country for many
years since the Ayatollah Khomeini. As
the old saying goes, when one tries to put two Ego Maniacal Maniacs in the same
room to fix a broken clock, they end up do more fighting than fixing. The same can be said about Bush and the
Iranian President, Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad. They are the appointed
leaders of the collective 2% in their perspective countries, and they both hate
each other enough that neither will sit down diplomatically with the
other. However more of the onus of
diplomacy in this case falls upon Bush, b/c he is the one making the threats in
this situation. It should also be noted
that Bush hates dissent and he despises diplomacy with Muslim nations such as
Iran, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq (before the invasion) (http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/12/139208).
Of course there is the strike first policy developed by this
administration as well (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0319-01.htm).
To Christians and Muslims going to war is a natural instinct based on
their respective ideologies. They are
both competing for the hearts and minds of the world. Christians love going to war because they believe that it’s a spiritual
crusade (http://jwismer922.tripod.com/Christocrats_and_WAR.htm).
While Muslims go to war because the feel their way of life is being
attacked by Christianity and Secularism.
The history of Islam (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Islam) and the history of Christianity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Christianity). The crusades (http://atheism.about.com/od/crusades/), (http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0109/S00176.htm), and more recent history (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=25301),shows a clear pattern of jockeying
for global positioning between the two major religions.
Recently, Bush said
this, “Bush’s observation to the
right-wing radio jocks that the War on Terror has to be about right versus
wrong, “because if it’s about Christianity versus Islam, we’ll lose.” (http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/politicalinsider/entries/2006/09/17/an_evening_with_ann_and_lynn.html). Now why would Bush specifically tell a group of
radical religious fanatics such as Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, and Bill Bennett,
not to include Christianity vs. Islam.
I don’t know, maybe because part of this war is about Christianity vs.
Islam? In another recent speech, Bush
mistakenly read one of is footnotes and said, “It’s hard work tying Iraq to
terrorism”. He also recently said that
Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 (http://www.alternet.org/blogs/video/40631/). I wrote before that Osama Bin Laden needed to
wait until a president like George W. Bush got in office (because he
represented the 2% like Bin Laden does) in order to achieve the war between the
west and the east, or Christianity vs. Islam (https://imjdwismer922.tripod.com/A_story_of_Osama_Bin_Laden.htm). Right
now we have a bunch of people in power in various nations around the world that
are finding it easy to provoke this president into going to war quite
easily. Saddam Hussein was no threat to
anyone in the Middle East let alone the United States. Bush’s ideology of spreading democracy into
the heart of the middle east is just a façade for proving to his father that
his more fanatical ideology can work.
Of course Iraq has been a tremendous ideological failure. But is that what the Bush administration was
really concerned with to begin with anyway.
9/11 has given the Bush Administration a lot of power and a lot of
capitol to work with, which of course is our fault for empowering the Bush
administration so much, b/c we elected the rubber stamp congress (http://www.dccc.org/rubberstampcongress/main.html) that allows the Bush Administration to enact that
power. 9/11 also brought into focus,
rather dramatically, the effect a fanatical religion can have on the
country. Recently Rosie O’ Donnell
said, “ "radical" Christians in America are just as much
of a threat as the followers of radical Islam who piloted hijacked jetliners
into New York's Twin Towers and the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001.” (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51956). Is she wrong? Basically she’s not right in the context of what she said. But the bottom line is she has a point when
it comes to the broader context of what the 2% is trying to accomplish, which
simply states is, THE DESTRUCTION OF THE OTHER. Unfortunately if we’re not vigilant, which
we haven’t been as of yet, we all will easily be thrown into the quagmire of
the clash of Islam vs. Christianity.
Well the United States already went into Iraq, and Bush
has been threatening Iran for the past year.
Osama Bin Laden is still mobile and is preparing for the upcoming war he
hopes will occur. Religious fanatics
are growing power every time the United States or Israel attack the sovereignty
of other Muslim nations. In the United
States apathy, political correctness, no oversight, and lack of intellectual
curiosity is allowing the religious fanatics in this country to thrive. Never before have religious fanatics such as
Ann Coulter, Jerry Falwell, James Dobson, Ralph Reed, Sean Hannity, and Bill
O’Reilly among others (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/ABRAMOFF_WHITE_HOUSE?SITE=DCUSN&SECTION=POLITICS&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT) to
have unprecedented access to the White House.
Of course in order for the religious fanatics to strive, you need to
have an unholy alliance with the economy and politics. The fact that we (the majority of us) of it
so well in the United States, and what people seem to care most about is oil
& money, movements such as these can operate exclusively underneath the
radar. Bush continues to be confident
in Iraq as he has said many times (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-03-20-bush_x.htm), and
that is not going to change as long as the people around him do not pressure
him to change. The entire
administration as the same blind religious zeal and confidence that what they
are doing is supremely right. Hence
that’s why Bush tries to impress how important it is for other religious
fanatics like Coulter and Hannity that this has to be about right vs. wrong (http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/politicalinsider/entries/2006/09/17/an_evening_with_ann_and_lynn.html). Of
course he believes is supremely right.
Of course Dick Cheney comes of like he’s a god talking down to his lower
subjects. Every time somebody tries to
cover up the Bush’s administration and say that religious has little to do with
their decision making the easier it is for Bush to lie to the American people.
Similarly when idiots like Jim
Wallis in his new book, God’s
Politics: Why the Right Gets It Wrong and the Left Doesn’t Get It, he
proclaims, like every other centrist moderate liberal relgious fanatic, that
the right is wrong and so is the left (http://www.motherjones.com/news/qa/2005/03/gods_politics_jim_wallis.html) and it really has nothing to do with religion in
general but one Administrations understanding of christianity. Certainly it’s tiresome to keep hearing the
ramblings of these so-called moderate christians. Jon Meachum, of Newsweek, is
also one that proclaims that his understanding of religion is better than
anyone elses. What’s there to
undrestand Jon & Jim? The fact that
both of you believe that you’re supremely right about religion does not differ
at all from the fanatical belief that the Bush Administration has that their
version of christianity is correct.
These wolf in sheep’s clothing fanatical moderates are worse that the
slow moving target and low hanging fruit that the neo-cons offer to the
table. Why would we buy into one
version of something that is inherently mythical to the other version? At least the most liberal religious folks
think that argument is pointless and should be left to the funny papers. Anytime one tries to indoctrinate their
version of dogma as opposed to the other, it has the same ideological
destruction, b/c no matter what you’re going to believe you’re supremely right.
So not only do we have
different morons fighting it out with another about which version of the
magical mythical religion is right, the religious fanatics want to invade Iran
as quickly as possilbe. While we’re
waiting to invade Iran, let’s torture so muslims with water boarding and put
aside the geneva conventions (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5197853/site/newsweek#storyContinued). And if torturing does not work the christian leaders
of the world will try to instigate that the entire muslim religion is violent (http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/09/15/pope.islam/index.html) which is fundamentally different than showing that
muslims have no sense of humor, which was demonstrated in the Mohammad cartoons
in a Danish Newspaper (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons_controversy). The pope (who
is an absolute joke anyway) has said before that Islam is a cursed religion (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=48464) and is incapable with civilization. Basically that’s the same argument that the
Bush Administration uses when he calls them Islamo Fascists (Godwin’s Law), and
when on Wolf Blitzer’s Situation Room last night Bush said, “When I saw Islamo
Fascists I mean all those muslims that oppress women, have intollerance of
christianity, violent in the name of religion, and are fanatical” (http://mediamatters.org/items/200609200010) or in other words the majority of muslims that live in the
Middle East. Of course to Bush it
doesn’t matter that we have that going on among Christian groups in our own
country (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Jeffs) (http://www.jesuscampthemovie.com/) (http://www.whbf.com/Global/story.asp?S=5393468) (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/hate_crime/index.html).
Whether or not you’ve been on
the receiving end of a chrisitan hate crime, or received death threats, or
worse of all had someone you know killed in Iraq, or by a religious fanatic on
9/11, or domestically, most people who have been made aware to religious
fanaticism have changed their way of looking at religion in general. The fact that moderate religious ideology if
finally being critisized for the fraudulent movement that it is is a positive
sign that people are finally starting to wake up. Unfortuanetly it’s too late for many of us that have been, or
will soon be caught up as an innocent bystander in the war of Islam vs.
Christianity. Most of the people that
will be killed by this war will be those that don’t make up the 2% of fanatical
Muslims and Chritians that are willing to die because of their beliefs. Just to
put into perspective how many people is 2% of Islam and Christianity: 68
Million people. That’s
more than enough people to start a global war.
Unfortuanely we can’t distant ourselves far enough away (another reason
we should invest in NASA) from this fanatical people so they can just go at it
on the battlefield and kill each other off.
I mean that’s what they want anyway, to die in the heat of spiritual
battle.
Our choice is
simple, if we’re going to get caught up in World War III between the two major
religions of Islam and Christianity we should try to at least minimize the
damage to the other 98% of the world
that doesn’t want anything to do with the 2%. In a very positive development the 5% of the 98% (roughly 200 Million people) are beginning to
become better organized and they have been fighting the battle between the 98%
and the 2%. Of course I’m referring to
Atheists (http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/local/states/california/15571253.htm), who have been
becoming a lot better organized in the United States. We’re not as organized as Europe of course, who are making
strides with the European Union: Dominique Moïsi, a special adviser at the
French Institute for International Relations, argues that “the combination of
religion and nationalism in America is frightening. We feel betrayed by God and
by nationalism, which is why we are building the European Union as a barrier to
religious warfare.” Josef Braml, of the German Institute for International and
Security Affairs, complains that in America “religious attitudes have more of
an influence on political choices than in any other western democracy.” (http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=7912626).
Major battles are being fought and either won or loss against the 2% that threatens our way of life, our peace, and our happiness. Even if we avoid World War III, the religious fanatics have made great in roads into the hearts and minds of the world. The Mohommad cartoons violent backlash challenged the right of free speech to the ideology of religious fanaticism in what amounted to a baby’s temper tantrum. In the United States, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/housing/rluipaexplain.htm) and the current bill Public Expression of Religion Act of 2005 (http://capwiz.com/au/utr/2/?a=9007716&i=81058857&c=) are ways in which the 2% are winning the hearts and minds of the general public. The more the republicans and the democrats try to reach out to these 2% the more power they have to win the hearts and minds of the general public (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/28/AR2006062800281.html). In recent startling developments the White House continues to go above and beyond outreach to their fellow 2% and Secretary General Alberto Gonzales and White House Press Secretary Tony Snow are going to be speaking at the Value Voter’s Conference (http://www.frcaction.org) being run by the Family Research Council. The speakers that will be standing side by side with Gonzales and Snow are Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity, Bill Bennett, Newt Gingrinch, Jerry Falwell, James Dobson, and Tony Perkins. This is by far the most blatant disregard for the Separation of Religion & Government that I’ve seen by the Bush Administration, and the Popular Media, with the exception of Raw Story (http://rawstory.com/), have totally ignored this. This gives new definition the term “Media Lapdogs”. Fox News, Katie Couric, Matt Lauer, CBS, and ABC being the worst violators of the media pandering to 2% or religious fanatics (http://penn.freefm.com/pages/27696.php).
Bottom line I don’t want to die in the name of some religious fanatics wet dream do you? It’s time to be proactive instead of waiting for the next shoe to drop (http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Pentagon_moves_to_secondstage_planning_for_0921.html). We’re going into Iran unless you join the 5% of us that have been fighting back against this ideology. No I’m not including the Anti-war people in the 5% because a large enough majority of them invoke God as moral justification against the war, and we as atheists find that equally problematic. That does not mean we respect what the anti-war movement is trying to accomplish, we just realize that invoking God is what got us in this predicament in the first place, so we find that type of attitude counterproductive and irrelevant. What is relevant is the fact that America needs to wake up to what the 2% is doing. It’s pretty obvious what happened on 9/11, but what about the way the 2% on both sides of 9/11 are using 9/11 to win the hearts and minds of the world. The Bush Administration has already turned one sovereign nation into a complete and utter disaster. The Bush administration have put WE, the innocent unwilling victims in harms way by their blatant disregard for humanity. The Bush Administration has made the next terrorist attack that much more effective due to the amount of fear for Islam that has spread across the country (https://imjdwismer922.tripod.com/xenophobic.htm).
Quoting the late Saul Alinsky, who was renowned for his community
organizing skills, Rudin noted that it only takes 2% of society to make change
if it is a well-organized, fully committed cadre. "The other 98% is pretty
inert.”