Politics On Fire - Blogs http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php Politics on Fire - A Political Debate and Discussion Forum en Wed, 09 Jul 2008 01:04:59 GMT vBulletin 60 http://www.politicsonfire.com/images/juice/misc/rss.jpg Politics On Fire - Blogs http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php Ignorance may not be so bliss. http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=27 Sun, 06 Jul 2008 05:05:26 GMT This morning I was at my MP and Industry Minister Jim Prentice’s stampede (pancake) breakfast, and I sure believe that it informed quite a few... This morning I was at my MP and Industry Minister Jim Prentice’s stampede (pancake) breakfast, and I sure believe that it informed quite a few people. With at least 30 people from the Fair Copyright For Canada Facebook group there, some heated debates came up, I got myself into one and hanging around listening in on others.
It was nice, well, seeing, Jim Prentice, I shook his hand for a few seconds and then he was off. I didn’t have a chance to ask some questions or comment on the Bill, but I’m sure quite a few people did and I’m awaiting what his response was and possibly for some video content.
I wanted to question Minister Prentice on how Bill C-61 will affect the Open Source industry and how the Bill will reduce or destroy any competition between media formats and creators.
The open source software that I am more specifically concerned about is Linux and its various applications such as Gimp or open source media formats such as .ogg. This bill could cease the production of open source software such as these in Canada because they most likely won’t contain DRM. Also, Linux is unable to play any music that has any type of lock on it because the open source developer don’t have the access to the keys to run DRM’d music. The only way to possibly play music on Linux is to break DRM.
Another concern of mine is how I will be able to play any of my music, will every media player other than iPod become obsolete? I own a PSP, which does great in playing media, but is unable to play any locked music.
Here’s what an information sheet given out at the protest said, it summarizes what the bill could do if passed quite well:
Quote:
Hands Off My DVDs - C-61 prohibits transferring DVDs to a computer or video player, locks out region coded DVDs
Hands Off My iPod - C-61 prohibits transferring copy-controlled CD to iPod
Hands Off My PVR - C-61 prohibits recording broadcast flagged TV shows
Hands Off My Teachers - C-61 forces teachers to destroy their digital lessons after 30 days
Hands Off My Librarians - C-61 forces librarians to use DRM (digial locks) for digital delivery of articles
Hands Off My Flim - C-61 is opposed by documentary filmmakers who fear it will make it more difficult to creat films
Hands Off My Artwork - C-61 locks out artists from using some works and makes it more difficult to create
Hands Off My Kids - C-61 makes lawsuits against teenagers more likely
Hands Off My Privacy - C-61 makes it more difficult to protect your privacy against DRM’d products
Hands Off My Copyright Rights - C-61 renders fair dealing obsolete in the digital world
Hands Off My Research - C-61 could make our researchers infringers for circumventing for reasearch purposes
Hands Off My Students - C-61 locks out students from accessing their digitally locked electronic books
For more info and find out how to help, please visit www.FairCopyrightForCanada.ca and join the Fair Copyright For Canada Facebook groups (both the national and local chapters)
]]> Mitch http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=27 The State of Our World http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=26 Wed, 18 Jun 2008 20:01:20 GMT "The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point, however, is to change it." - Karl Marx

It should come as no surprise to anyone that there is a great deal of injustice in our world; essentially everything is not as it should be; we humans do not act as we should. This is in our nature, according to philosophers and tyrants. That is to say that our nature is to be selfish; our nature is to be narrow-minded and apathetic. I for one do not believe that these actions are coded into every person (and thus able to be pointed to as justification for self-centred and short-sighted idiocy), but simply brought to the surface by various aspects of our society. Granted, the potential for every person to be selfish is certainly there, as are the kernels of greed, corruption, etc. The point, however, is that it need not be this way, and it certainly should not be, if we wish to have any hope of survival (and freedom, god forbid).

In general we prefer to ignore or even justify our wrongs, on both the small and larger scales. Typically we avoid looking to the larger whole at all, for fear of what we might (and almost certainly will) find. The result is that people are utterly trapped in the particular, in any given moment, in any given thing, only as it applies to them directly. This unwillingness or inability to look at or grasp the larger whole is the primary reason our existence is (and is destined to be) so troubled. The world cannot change without a change in the attitudes of the people themselves. That is to say that any drastic departure from our idiocy first requires the people themselves to recognize their actions as such. However this recognition alone is not enough, from there they must be willing to act.

There are many things, both domestic and in the world at large, which should cause some degree of outrage amongst the people. While we claim to be against slavery, we overlook the fact that our nations have enslaved the bulk of the world; while we claim to be appalled by such actions as murder, we ignore that we are causing the starvation, poverty, and otherwise suffering of billions of people across the globe. Our lifestyles, our selfishness, our addiction to wealth cause all this. Money is but a means of enacting control over the masses, and it has certainly succeeded in enslaving us, as much as we would like to ignore it.

The atrocities for which we without exception are responsible, that is to say those that we cause by our actions (or lack thereof), are not limited in direction toward other peoples. We ourselves will fall (and have fallen) victim to the system under which we live. Already we are slaves to money, our god whose worship is universal and without which we cannot survive. It is through this unquestioned and absolute devotion to wealth (which is essentially devotion solely to the self) that control over us is maintained. Our lives are based around the acquisition and accumulation of wealth. Where we might focus on living, on all the things which make us human, we will instead dedicate ourselves wholly to material gains. The irony of this entirely self-focused attitude is in that it essentially damns the individual, and the society, to an existence whose only purpose is to serve their masters (those who have larger amounts of money).

As I have stated previously, the core of the problem is the fact that people are unwilling to grasp the larger whole. As we do not think beyond our (generally immediate) position and status in society, we become unable to understand the effects of our actions, and in turn the influences those previous effects will have on our life. It cripples us with an inability to recognize the patterns of history; it makes us unable to grasp the motivations behind political actions, etc.; however, most importantly, it destroys our ability to grasp the necessity of action, as well as the target and/or purpose of said action. While we may be upset with a war for instance, we protest the war and not the causes of it; we complain about an economic crisis but not its cause nor its implications in the future; we are appalled by human rights abuses but remain unaware as to why they occur or perpetuate.

In essence, we have been rendered entirely powerless by our imprisonment in the particular, in minor details (details taken out of their proper context). While some one may become upset with government, their outrage is limited to the immediate actions of the government, not the historical trend which has always been the same. Those in government (Save those as the very top, perhaps), have just as little understanding as the average person. Yes, our government is acting incorrectly, but simply replacing them will have absolutely no effect. If we wish to enact a change, the only way to accomplish such is a change first on the individual level, in every person. Each one of us must ascend from the irrelevant details, to the larger whole; from the particular to the general. Then and only then can a true revolution in government, and our way of life, bring any success. ]]> Cattraknoff http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=26 The Power of Free Will http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=25 Thu, 24 Apr 2008 03:36:48 GMT Of all the answers I’ve sought throughout my life, one question stands out from the rest; Are we, humanity, doomed to a fate of slavery? Not all of... Of all the answers I’ve sought throughout my life, one question stands out from the rest; Are we, humanity, doomed to a fate of slavery? Not all of us of course; Some would of course rule over the rest. We approach this destiny with every day that passes without action. Each day we choose ignorance over truth. Is it because we must, or because we have been taught to do so? It may or may not be in our nature as a species; However we do seem capable, if unwilling, of defying our nature regardless. Humans are the only race that we know of with this ability, even if it is generally not used to its full potential.

One might ask just what it is which allows us to do this. It could simply be that our more sophisticated brains allow us to consider more options, give us more paths to choose from. The question that would remain in this case is whether or not we truly do have any control over our actions at all, whether “free will” really does exist. Is it just a given firing of neurons which lead us to think any given thought, to perform any given action, based on the given circumstance and prior knowledge? One could even argue that seemingly erratic actions were triggered by a given set of pre-conditions, and the person in question’s reaction were a result of a greater urge to do one action than another; Someone might decide to do an action therefore simply for the sake of proving to themselves that they do indeed have a choice. However you must also consider that a realisation (whether true or not), that they really have no control over their lives, that they are not “special”, no different from animals, would in all likelyhood lead to emotional discomfort or sorrow; Therefore they would desire to prove to themselves, as a means of preventing this, that they do have a real choice. The question that must be asked is whether free will exists at all; To believe it does, one must equate it to something metaphysical, or spiritual. This in turn suggests and is dependant on a belief in a higher power to have given it to us.

However even if a higher power of sorts does exist, it does not necessarily mean we were given souls, although it does make the idea entirely possible. Free will in this situation would be a result of this spirit, the actions you, or perhaps your soul itself decides to take, although it will certainly be influenced by the physical world. This would imply a real freedom of choice, which would thereby suggest that humans are capable of changing their actions and defying their “nature” simply as a matter of choice. This might be to free themselves from an addiction, or to in any other way improve themselves (or perhaps worsen their condition, as the case may be).

The vast majority of religious people, as well as many of those who are non-religious, believe in the idea of a soul; Many base their lives around the idea that their actions in life will affect them after their death. The source of this in most cases is a result of the education given to them by their parents as well as others since early childhood. There is however another, albeit far less common source of this metaphysical belief. It generally stems from the many unanswered questions that science itself leaves; The most convincing arguments for a creator stem from the origins of life itself. The fact that life, to our knowledge, cannot occur spontaneously (there are many required basic components of a cell which require already-existing life to create, such as proteins, which require various other forms of already-functioning proteins to create), gives significant credence to the idea of a creator. There are many other at least unlikely and almost certainly impossible occurrences which must be accepted as true in order to believe life has risen of its own accord. For instance, even given the basic component that make up a protein (which likely wouldn’t be laying around anyway), the odds of even one of them forming in the specific way which allows them to carry out a single one of life’s essential processes, are even more minute than one in the number of all the stars in all the galaxies in the known universe; To put this in perspective, that number lies in the billions of trillions (a one with twenty-one zeros) estimated to be in our viewing range.

Consequently it would seem to be unlikely that life would have arisen without some outside influence. A creator would be suggested, and therefore the idea of a metaphysical spirit would seem possible (though still not by any means certain). The question still remains as to what extent this spirit influences us. There are addictions and habits in the body as well as the mind which many seem unable to rid themselves of; Perhaps this simply results from an unwillingness to do it, for all the effort that would be required. This can be partially be blamed on the general attitudes of people in various societies throughout history and in the present. We are all educated that it is completely acceptable and even better to be lazy. That if something requires too much effort, it generally isn’t worth it. We’re taught that it’s completely acceptable that we’re flawed, that we should accept them and never work to rectify them. Flaws may be normal, however it would seem that all life evolves by attempting to improve on itself, it is therefore even apparent that in our inaction, we are defying another part of our nature, that which would have us strive to better ourselves and our world. This has been in part accomplished by all of our educators (our forms of entertainment being chief among them) teaching us that just getting by is enough, that surviving rather than flourishing is all that matters. We therefore accept imperfections, because after all things could be worse; While it is true that things could get much worse, to treat this as justification for apathy and ignorance is to ensure that things will undoubtedly get worse. There are many aspects of human nature, and to always wish to better our position (the source of envy), is a very powerful one; It is not simply human nature, but the nature of life itself. Modern societies encourage this aspect above all others, though only in the material sense. We always wish more money, cars, power, etc. because our capitalist society tells us that this what matters most. As a result we have justified extreme degrees of selfishness, not only to others but to ourselves. We tell ourselves that it is perfectly fine to think of ourselves, our own position, without heed to the consequences in the long-term or to others. We’re taught that we should turn a blind eye to others’ suffering, because to do anything significant to change things would require effort on our own part and perhaps even damage us materialistically in the short-term.

It should then come as no surprise to anyone when those who already have a great deal of power in such a society, still continue to work only to better their own position; These people, having a much greater resource base at their disposal, are therefore able to expand their own power and influence at ever-increasing rates. This effect is amplified by the fact that, those in lesser positions, in their ignorance, focus solely on themselves (and perhaps some who they interact with regularly, be it for good or ill), paying little heed to the world at large. As a consequence, those who are on top in terms of power, are able to continue virtually uninterrupted by the masses (and often with their help, albeit unknowingly) at expanding their control. The result is an endless cycle in which the already powerful (be it in wealth, political influence, or both) gain increasing amounts of control, at the expense of the general populace. The end result is a form of tyranny, though if the tyrant(s) in question are intelligent, the people will remain ignorant even then. The apparent inability of the people to look at the bigger picture has resulted in the same things happening in virtually every society throughout history.

The answer to the original question dictates whether hope exists at all; Since this answer is not entirely knowable; the hope lay within yet another hope. If free will, in the manner in which it is commonly referred to does exist, humanity is indeed capable of defying the self-centred and short-sighted aspects of their nature; If we can do this, then we are fully able to change the world, and all societies therein, for the better. The question that remains then is whether or not we truly wish to work for it. The window for action is closing; The ability to remain get by remaining ignorant and apathetic is disappearing rapidly. If we do not change, as a whole, the vast majority of us will be doomed to a fate of slavery and needless death; There is even a significant chance free will itself will be suppressed through means of controlling emotions and inhibiting thought itself.

The final question to be asked is this: Are we willing to work to ensure our survival, and our freedom? I'm quite certain it is a matter of choice; True action must be taken, but only after each person comes to understand what is happening in the world. Nothing happens of its own accord in this world; Governments and corporations don't become corrupt unless the people allow them to. Each of us must understand how it happens, or anything I or anyone can tell them will be useless anyway. Humanity as a whole must change its attitude, defying what many have called “our nature”. Then and only then can a democratic society function as it was intended to; The ideals of justice and equality rely wholly on the people ensuring that they are realised. Whether we think we are able to succeed or not, the time for action is now; To fail to do so is to surrender any semblance of hope that remains to us. ]]> Cattraknoff http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=25 Hail To Liberty http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=24 Tue, 22 Apr 2008 01:27:21 GMT The founding principles in most democracies are based around the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Democracies seek to ensure... The founding principles in most democracies are based around the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Democracies seek to ensure that all people are given the ability and opportunity to succeed, regardless of birth position. While belief in liberty and freedoms are nearly universal to the western world, many fail to realise that their apathy is destroying the very foundations of their democratic society.

The greatest lie of the modern world is in the power apparently granted to the people under a democratic system. The falsehood is not an outright lie however, but a half truth. The unspoken truth is that democracy indeed is a form of government which can grant power to the people; However the trouble lay in the fact that given an uncaring and unattached populace, corruption is quick to fester, resulting in power being rapidly transferred into the hands of increasingly few, namely the aristocracy. These are people born into the upper-most classes, inherently being given large amounts of wealth and power.

Democracy's failure is amplified when the ruling class, being generally educated and intelligent, begins to wear away at the transparency of government; The need for secrecy becomes apparently greater than the need to maintain a just system of government. They remain hidden, controlling nations from behind a curtain of half-truths and whole lies. It is quite obvious as to the reason why they have such a desire for deception, given that the people would almost certainly not take kindly to their freedom and power being blatantly robbed from them; Were they to act in the open, it would run the risk of the people breaking out of their ever-present apathy and self-imposed delusions.

While it is generally inevitable for extensive corruption to emerge in any society, it requires a certain degree of extreme and unusual circumstances to justify the removal of freedoms, as well as encourage the intentional ignorance of fundamental human rights. There are some few situations wherein the people will willingly accept such, among them being war, or other disastrous events. Each reason is centred around fear; Fear of being conquered, attacked, or perhaps of damage to their way of life, long-term liberty, and safety.

As a result, the people can be and often are convinced that in order to save themselves and their families they must make concessions in their rights. This degradation of their freedom is generally meant to be temporary, at least on the surface; Once the emergency passes, the rights of the people must be promptly restored, so that life may return to some semblance of normalcy. Provisions to accommodate this are included in most democratic constitutions. These measures can be necessary at times; However the situations wherein it is acceptable must be clearly defined, along with the means to return to normal. Modern democracies, having supposedly learned from the past lessons, had generally adhered to this principle, and minimized loopholes that might be exploited. This has led to a prolonged period of democratic rule, which has been accompanied by almost-constant prosperity. Consequently the people have grown complacent; They have forgotten the lessons of history, or perhaps haven't even learned them. Few of them have dealt with tyranny, and fewer still understand its causes. This can be attributed to the general disinterest in history shown by the vast majority of people. One must blame as well the obsession with entertainment apparent in the people; They would much rather be constantly amused than expand there knowledge and thereby empower themselves.

Generally this self-imposed ignorance stems from a need for escapism; The people wish to forget the troubles of their day-to-day life, along with the numerous problems afflicting the world at large. It's far more comfortable to live in ignorance, at least in the short-term, and people are quite short-sighted as a rule. This form of escapism likely took root in its modern form during the Great Depression of the 1930's people visited movie theatres and sought other distractions from their sorrows en-masse.In the present day, many have even come to know these fictional worlds better than the real one; This is apparent in the mass celebrity-worship seen throughout western culture, or the countless hours nearly any given person sits with eyes glued to the television set.

The overwhelming ignorance of the western world serves to ensure that the growing ambitions of the ruling class are virtually unchecked. They are free to act as they will, free to bide their time until the point wherein they may abandon the illusion and enslave the people in their entirety. The dream of absolute power is close at hand, with what must seem as absolutely no chance at all for the people to prevent it. From childhood it is drilled into peoples' heads that they are powerless in the grand scheme of things, they are taught that their ignorance is the far better choice, that they should simply live in the moment and enjoy themselves as much as they can. This philosophy leads to an empty contentment, seldom truly making anyone happy. Many live with the illusion of being such, though happiness through ignorance is not happiness at all, it is simply blindness.

The world has fallen into a stupor; The people of the west blind themselves to the effects of their governments' arrogance. The rest of the world tend to be blinded by either short-sighted jealousy, their religions, or a combination of the two. All seek to profit at the expense of others, and as a result the current ruling class can remain secure in its position. The aristocracy relies on the people being divided as they are. They pit one nation against each other, race against race, religion against religion, and even political parties and towns. The people now focus on all the ways in which they are different; They make this sound beneficial by supposedly encouraging you to recognize and accept those differences, however it generally just serves to inspire distrust, as people and nearly all animals by nature distrust anything they do not know.

Consequently the populace is divided, and the chance for the people uniting to work for a greater good is slim to nil. While this situation remains, there is absolutely no chance to end the corruption in the current system of government. There is absolutely no way to undo the damage to fundamental human and democratic rights done in recent years. The problems will continue to get worse, until the point wherein the people are stripped of any power they might have had; They shall live as slaves, their lives forfeit the moment they aren't profitable to keep alive. The people had better get used to being thought of as property, as that's what they will in all likelyhood become as a result of their apathy.

For all this, there still remains some hope. It isn't in some outside nation coming and fixing things, as supposedly happened to Nazi Germany. The people must rise up as one, and demand that their rights be restored; The only chance they have to preserve their freedom lay in putting their differences aside, and working to make the world as it should be. No longer can humanity get by writing every injustice off as "the way the world works", or "human nature". Free will exists to be used, and it is the one thing that separates humans from other animals. That free will allows people to defy what is supposedly their nature, to defy the greed and selfishness which has been programmed into them by their cultural and born influences. The human race must awaken, now and forever, and work to make the future we rightly should have. A new age of intellectual and spiritual enlightenment might begin, otherwise our fate is sealed in darkness. We must dare to dream, and have the courage to work towards those dreams. Liberty and justice are ours for the taking; We need only open our eyes to the world. ]]> Cattraknoff http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=24 A Question of Fate http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=23 Mon, 21 Apr 2008 22:23:39 GMT Note: Revision pending, after which I'll post it in a thread.

Many times I've been asked, as I'm sure others have: where I would see myself in the future, be it five, ten, or twenty years down the road. There are many ways to approach the question, though generally the answer given will be where a person hopes they will end up. If everything works out just right, they will be happy, have a great job with little to worry about. Others simply don't care and will just end up where they end up.

Whenever asked this, I lack a straight-forward answer. I might decide to be any number of things, choose from a variety of careers. I would wonder though, why is it that when asked "What do you want to be when you grow up?" we always associate it with just that, our career. When asked this all-important question, I used to have a variety of answers. It ranged from a soldier or firefighter as a child, to a scientist, accountant, teacher, or even politician. The question I've begun to ask myself more recently would provide answers to both of the previous questions.

What will the world be like in five, ten, or twenty years; What will I be able to be? These are the questions that must be asked. While it's impossible to know with absolute certainty, given that things can and often do change, the world, the course of history, has been on the same course for generations, perhaps since the dawn of mankind. There is a fate which each and every one of us is contributing to, a destiny for all of humanity. With each action we take, or every time we stand by and watch from the sidelines, we are deciding the fate of our species. One could with reasonable accuracy, based in historic trends, predict what the world might be like. On top of that one must also look to what governments and scientists today are doing. Combine this with economic trends and you might have a pretty good idea as to how the world will look.

Of course this all relies on having some knowledge of history and current events. The question becomes increasingly complex as you include more and more factors, though it really doesn't need to. The only real requirement is to look at human nature itself. People are generally selfish and short-sighted; This is especially apparent in western cultures given that our capitalist system and general way of life goes to great lengths to encourage it. You must look at the average person in a given society, in order to see what fate they are shaping for themselves. The people of the modern world, and even ancient worlds, generally care only about themselves, in their day-to-day lives; They generally ignore much of what goes on in the world at large. Granted they might watch a news program every now and then, but they fail to give it much consideration beyond that. Of course there are exceptions, however those exceptions are not enough to guide humanity's fate.

This trouble is nurtured in modern societies by means of mass-media outlets. Mainstream news is afflicted by massive amounts of useless celebrity worship; More worrying is the lack of dissenting news sources. It is a little-known fact that the boards of directors in many of the corporations controlling media outlets are interconnected. Worse still, many of these corporate boards in turn share members with other major corporations, such as defense contractors and oil companies. It should come as no surprise then that they wouldn't bring forward many viewpoints that were against the War on Terror.

This only scratches the surface of the problems afflicting our societies. The fact that mainstream media is generally one-sided alone is enough to destroy democracy in its entirety. How many of these corporate news sources have addressed the fact that the towers collapsing in 9/11 was physically impossible; Or even mentioned the overwhelming evidence suggesting that the 2004 US election was blatantly rigged? The answer is quite obviously absolutely none of them. The reporters who questioned the government account often lost their positions, if their stories were even read.

It gets even worse when you take into consideration the coverage of the new anti-terror measures. Few people neither know or perhaps even care that the wording of anti-terror laws allow even human rights protesters to be tried as domestic terrorists, stripped of their citizenship, and given a trial under the new, critically acclaimed military "justice" system. A system wherein they do not even have to be provided with a lawyer, and absolutely nothing that transpires therein is made public knowledge. This essentially allows the government to take anyone whom they choose, be them political dissidents or even people at random, strip them of their constitutional and human rights, and make them disappear. These measures could be equated to a fascist society, even if we still supposedly have fair elections. Some would argue that this won't happen in Canada, those are frankly short-sighted. Canada must cooperate with the US in regards to security and even economic policy; They will pretend to tighten security, slowing our exports to them and thus damaging our economy, if our government even has the courage to stand up to them (don't count on it, Harper is a big fan of Bush and the American way).

Other laws brought into place add further icing to this already delicious cake (for our masters, mind you). For instance Bush or any future president may declare martial law (military rule; READ: Dictatorship) in the name of any disaster or emergency he or she deems a necessary reason. This is all at the presidents discretion, and they do not even have to inform either of their houses of representatives in order to do this. This means that the President will be given absolute control over all three branches of government (Executive, Legislative, and Judicial). Meaning he has control of the courts, and any and all lawmaking. This is on par with Hitler's enabling act in scope and effect. Furthermore it allows the President to assume control of state national guard troops (this is unconstitutional) as well as police forces (Also unconstitutional).

Shockingly (right....?) mainstream media's coverage of the aforementioned provisions was simply mentioning in passing that the people would be safer because these new laws would allow the government to better keep the evil terrorists away from them. What amuses me personally is the fact that the US government claims to be fighting terror and protecting the American people (This is why they went to Iraq and Afghanistan, mind you), however Bush is probably Bin Laden's chief benefactor. Butchering hundreds of thousands of people in those wars (often by indiscriminate targeting in urban areas) serves to fill Al-Quaeda with more angry recruits than they know what to do with, and certainly encourages other countries who fear they may be next to help them... albeit with a bit more subtlety. What's more, several Islamic clerics have authorized Al-Quaeda to use nuclear weapons against the Americans, if they can get ahold of them. This was justified by them saying that the Americans are responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths, so nukes would be a great way to reciprocate.

Now, the media's coverage on the idea of terrorists getting nukes has actually been fairly substantial comparatively. However this is mainly associated with Iran getting them; Iran in all likelyhood would not use nuclear weapons if they ever acquired any. The chief reasoning for this is the fact that the Americans would wipe them off the face of the earth. I'm pretty sure most people don't want to be killed in nuclear hellfire. Sure you might say "Hey, they're doing it for their religion!", but one must also consider that in the end they want to win. They want to destroy the Americans. Killing half a million people or less with a single nuke isn't going to destroy the Americans, but it will certainly destroy them and any chance of victory along with it.

One thing the media didn't really mention is that, for all the new security measures and the presumed threat of a nuclear weapon being used (there is a good chance it will happen actually, just not by Iran or anyone else who is in a defined area), American security has barely been tightened. The FBI, on more than one occasion tested to see if a nuke could be smuggled in on a freight container on a ship. Each time, customs failed to detect the nukes and that city would've had a sizable chunk missing had it been a real situation. The US only checks about 9% of the cargo coming in by ship, and the US government has stated that ships are the most likely route for a nuke to take. So then I would ask, if they're so damned interested in security and keeping the people safe, why the hell aren't they screening their cargo more effectively; Damn the costs, they spend over 500 billion on defense (not including Iraq or Afghanistan), why the hell isn't it going to anything worthwhile?

The answer is simple. If a nuke goes off, imagine the public reaction; 9/11 would be absolutely nothing in comparison. The people would outright demand that they be stripped of the rights they think they have left, in order to keep them safe. The people running the US rely on fear such as this to maintain and expand their power and influence. They don't have to nuke themselves, because that would be harder to cover up (though they successfully did it with 9/11 and launched two illegal wars thereafter). What they've done is pissed off the Muslim world, portions of which are indeed nuclear armed already. Now all they have to do is wait. It is unlikely that a President would be stupid enough to declare martial law over something as silly as an earthquake (though by rights they could). However, when it comes to the nuclear attack, it will be seen as completely justified, reasonable, and prudent to do so, by the vast majority of the populace. What they do and will still fail to realise is that the opening is there, and the government sees it. They choose to do nothing, to leave the country vulnerable. There is no real justification for this, the only reason is that they actually wish the country to be attacked.

People must come to realise that the new powers granted to governments are more likely to be used to oppress the people rather than to protect them. The cases throughout history where this has happened are far too numerous to cite, but the most prominent among them is in Nazi Germany, as I cited previously. We must learn, quickly, that our governments are not working for us, they have an agenda, one of complete and total domination of not only us, their current subjects, but the entire world. Had they wished to protect us, they would not have opened the door for 9/11 or even carried out the attack themselves (These are the only two real options, though the people don't seem to even care about 9/11 any more). They would focus less on spying on the people, on attempting to shut down the greatest free information source (the internet), and more on actually tightening security.

There are many new methods of control being developed. Eliminating the internet in its current form is the next step on the path to blinding the people. However right now there are already in use weapons that can restrict peoples' thoughts and even shape their emotions. These are developed and tested under the pretenses of being "non-lethal", as they only supposedly cause a severe amount of pain or other discomfort. What isn't talked about is the fact that these actually violate fundamental human rights, namely the right to think freely and without restriction. These weapons can be used to fill your head with white noise, interfering with your thought process (on a slightly humorous but also sickening note, Wal-Mart and McDonalds are also experimenting with advertisements in this form). I mentioned earlier as well the manipulation of emotions, while this might seem far-fetched, it is actually entirely possible and even in use today. This technology is in fact very old, first developed by Nikola Tesla in the early 1900's. Though some of his research was lost, much "future weaponry" has been based on his theories.

To see the fate of humanity one must, as was previously stated, look to the past; See the methods Hitler and other tyrants used to gain power. Then look to the present, observe the actions of your governments. Our governments are working first and foremost to expand their control over the people. Where TVs and other sources of entertainment are being used now (and have been for several decades, mind you), soon they shall give way to more direct methods of control. While they cannot in theory force you to think what they wish (short of brainwashing you to do so from childhood as our TVs do, though that's mere encouragement), they can generally guide them; They can control your emotions, by stimulating certain areas of the brain. This would be sufficient to blind the people further, though it still remains yet one more step on a greater path; As to the where the next step leads, one can only speculate. ]]> Cattraknoff http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=23 Child Support...A System With Victims On Both Sides http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=22 Wed, 02 Apr 2008 23:56:02 GMT The reason why I became a lawyer is the same reason I am a Truth Fighter, and that is to shed light on the truth in a system I feel needs much... The reason why I became a lawyer is the same reason I am a Truth Fighter, and that is to shed light on the truth in a system I feel needs much improvement.
In an effort to continue my mission, today I am launching ChildSupporttv.com. This site has been set up to bring attention to an issue that has victims on both sides, custodial parents and non custodial parents
It is a system that imprisons non custodial parents and in some states charges them with a felony for back child support, even if the parent is living below the poverty level and a system that leaves 62% of custodial parents without child support leaving them and their children to live below the poverty level.
Childsupporttv.com has been set up to give both sides a place to tell their stories and empower themselves with the tools to understand their rights. It has also been set up to put pressure on the powers that be to work on reforming this system that even victimizes our soldier’s who come back from the war to find their licenses suspended and bank accounts garnished over back child support from orders that existed before they went off to war.
Half of uneducated African American men ages 25-34 are non-custodial fathers. The child support they struggle to pay usually does not go to their children, but instead goes to the state to reimburse the cost of public assistance, including welfare, for the mother and children. This is demoralizing for low-income men struggling to make a difference in their kids’ lives. Some of these fathers even live with their children and their children’s mothers, yet their wages are still garnisheed to pay child support to the state.
Many minority non custodial fathers have spent time in prison, often for nonviolent drug offenses. Under the current system, these men rack up thousands of dollars in child support arrearages while they are incarcerated. Interest accrues rapidly, and upon release many ex-offenders struggle under a staggering debt they could never hope to pay off. Some even return to jail for nonpayment.
Log on to childsupportv.com and tell us your story and empower yourself with knowledge how to navigate this system. We want 1,000,000 Americans to tell us their story so we can put pressure on Congress to work on reforming this system.
Each and every week we will also Take It To The Nation, to get your opinion on a story concerning Child Support.
As we learn more about the system I will bring in experts from government agencies as well as non profits to help us find solutions to this issue that effects all Americans regardless of color or economic status.
Warren Ballentine ESQ.
truthfighters.tv
Child Support Facts
1. A non custodial parent's passport can be taken away for owing $2,500 in child support
2. When soldiers go off to war their child support orders remain the same, even though their income has dropped
3. 1 in 3 Custodial Parents not receiving Child Support Are Poor (census bureau)
4. Women below the poverty level are the least likely to be awarded or to receive child support. Black and Hispanic mothers are even less likely to be awarded support or to benefit from payments
5. In some states not paying Child Support can be considered a Felony, even if the parent is living below poverty level and cannot afford it.
6. In 2005, the 6.8 million custodial parents who were due Child Support under the terms of legal awards or informal agreements were due a total of $ 38 billion dollars in child Support payments and received a total of $ 24.8 billion. (census bureau)
7. Over 30 million Americans are in the Child Support System
Child Supporttv.com is a partnership between Warren Ballentine, The Peoples Attorney and national talk show host and Reach Marketing and Advertising Inc. ]]> childsupporttv http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=22 A Prudent Course http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=21 Wed, 02 Apr 2008 02:52:02 GMT When asked what the best, least corruptible form of government is, the vast majority of people would respond that it is obviously Democracy. The... When asked what the best, least corruptible form of government is, the vast majority of people would respond that it is obviously Democracy. The power and freedoms given to the people in such a system, combined with a free capitalist society should in theory allow anyone to succeed in a Democracy, anyone to lead as a result of their merit and not birth. As with all theories as to a “perfect” form of government, the Democratic one tends to be overly idealistic regarding human nature. Indeed, nearly any form of government could function quite remarkably if the leaders were benevolent, intelligent and selfless individuals. The corruption inherent in human nature is generally left out of the equation altogether, and so the failure of each becomes inevitable.

Democracy can and often does succeed in prolonging this failure, though it cannot prevent the smallest seed of corruption from being planted. Once this corruption does inevitably arrive, it will grow exponentially when left unchecked. Democracy, of all systems tried thus far does provide the most stable regime in the long-term, as the people see little reason to revolt against a government which is supposedly “by and for” them. This long-term stability however ends up being the Achilles-Heel of the system, given the fact that once certain groups attain a great deal of wealth and/or influence in politics, there is no new changing of regimes to provide a fresh start. As a consequence of this, corruption has a very long time to fester, and before long the inevitable near-monopolization of wealth and power becomes apparent.

Moreover, even when this does occur, the people tend to retain faith that things can be changed in their current political system, because they hold the power after all. While it is indeed true that the people hold the power, this is the same in any nation, be it democratic or dictatorial. This power however is not a result of their voting, this power is out of the fear that the government should have if they become overly corrupt, if they begin working against the will of the people. The ruling class must always fear a revolution, and as a result they work to appease the people, just enough that they remain content. The regime in question will surpass any reasonable limits to corruption if and when this fear can be removed. While in theory any populace could rise up in rebellion, given support of the vast (80 or 90%) majority, the simple fact is that in most cases the people fail to realise the problem until it is too late to act. After the ruling class decides that it wishes to oppress the people, a campaign will always begin in order to pacify them before hand, usually beginning with measures to gain control of the media.

Once control of the media is attained, their task becomes significantly easier. Information fed to them will be that designed to stupify them, terrify them and more often than not, both. This is apparent today in the increasing celebrity worship working in tandem with news of the latest terrorist attacks. The people would not surrender their rights under normal circumstances, extreme circumstances, or the illusion of such must be employed to allow the people to turn a blind eye without raising too many questions. Terrorism, whether the attacks are encouraged or not, provides this quite adequately. This alone is not enough however, as increasing economic worries combined with global warming give the people even more to be frightened of, even more to distract them. The general public must be made to fear these things and nothing else. The measures brought about crippling their freedoms must look as if they are to protect them, that they might feel safe and secure in their ignorance.

Following this campaign to blind the people, the ruling class may feel secure in its position. Fear of revolution is all but non-existent, resulting in them having what is essentially a free hand in whatever they may wish to do. At this point corruption will grow at its fastest rate, as the government now has the power to oppress the people more obviously, should they so choose to. Often however little obvious action will be taken even at this point, the people must first become accustomed to the government imposing on their rights, they must learn to trust in the laws stripping them of their liberty. The people when given the choice can and often do sacrifice this liberty, even in the small amounts, to preserve this security. What always results from this is increasing measures to rob them of their freedoms, leading to the eventual enslavement of the people. While this slavery is not always blatantly obvious, the general result is the same: The people lose any real choice in matters of government, and most live as second-class citizens, unless they are fortunate enough to be among the wealthy. Even still those with wealth have little freedoms, their ability to speak and think as they see fit stripped from them, though their comforts keep them content.

The question then is at what point is it prudent to prevent their rulers from acting against them? While open oppression is not immediate and sometimes even never happens, injustices will show themselves. The moment a government brings about measures designed to encroach on the rights of the people, action must be taken. Empty justifications must not be accepted, as any limits to their liberty brought about will lead to more, and will always be exploited as a rule without exception. The government must swiftly be brought into line the moment corruption begins to manifest itself. If the people fail to act at this crucial time, their ability to prevent the tyranny to come will be slim to say the least. Though there might always remain a small chance of revolution, once free media sources have been eliminated it becomes difficult if not impossible to organize one which has any hope of being successful.
This point has indeed been reached in the modern world. Corporate control is increasing at an astonishing rate. This control is over the government, and even the people directly. It is achieved through control of the information the people receive, providing them with the ability to sway public opinion on a whim. Simultaneously they are working through the government to strip people of their civil rights. They can already arrest anyone they wish without trial or even evidence. Privacy rights are also being encroached upon, justified as a means to prevent terrorist attacks. These measures if abused allow them to find and eliminate political dissidents, to silence anyone who might speak against them. Throughout history there has never been an occasion wherein such measures, once brought into place, were not abused by those in power. The ruling class is completely aware of this, and democratic “leaders” certainly should be. There is absolutely no reason for these laws to be brought into place unless they were intended to be exploited in the first place.

As corruption has grown to the point wherein the ruling class is beyond any and all control, the people are given one final chance to act. The only opportunity to prevent the tyranny to come is now, and it will disappear with the loss of the last open means of communication: the free Internet. Corporations are quickly moving to suppress this, offering the people a much faster infrastructure combined with increased security against ever-frightening viruses and hackers as a means of compensating them for the death of liberty. Unless the people are able to realise what is happening and grasp the necessity of action, they will lose all the freedoms they have taken for granted. Their future is almost an absolute certainty, and will be before long. Unless this small window for action available is used promptly, they shall earn and suffer under a fate worse than most of them can imagine.

While the people do have some meaningful hope of change through a revolution against the status-quo, simply overthrowing the government and even the most corrupt corporations will not suffice to save them. At best this will provide a fresh start, wherein the exact same pattern will emerge again in a few years, or a few centuries. The next time it does occur there is even less probability of it being successful, as their masters are generally far better at learning from the past than they are. This can be attributed to the fact that the ruling class does actually try to think of better, more subtle ways to oppress them, while the general public gives it scarcely any consideration whatsoever. This inequality of care and effort remains the primary reason every government in history has faced problems of rampant corruption; This is why the people have always been oppressed, simply because they allow themselves to be.

As a consequence, any revolution which is intended to prevent massive corruption in the long-term as well as the short, must involve a revolution not only against the government, but against the manner of thought which allows the corruption in the first place. Any democracy or even dictatorship may only be just if the people go out of their way to ensure that it is. While free flow of information is certainly necessary for it to work, that freedom must be utilized to the utmost. The people must indeed begin to care about politics, about the world at large. Disliking the actions of politicians is not and has never been a valid excuse to ignore them. Doing so as a rule results in only one end: Tyranny. The ruling class want you to ignore them, they want you to avoid seeking truth in general. This is why they used to favor forcing people into following their religion of choice, that they didn't question them because to do so would be to insult god and damn themselves to eternal torment. Now the subtlety has largely increased, at least in the west. Forcing religion on people is no longer effective, and so they provide distractions, anything which might make the people avoid thinking too much. The concept is not entirely new, though the scale and effect of the modern implementation certainly puts all others to shame. The people must come to understand these patterns in those who would seek to control them, or they shall always remain powerless against them.

Moreover, all of the lies told to them throughout their lives must be brought to light, the truth exposed and understood. The truth is that their governments seldom work for the peoples' interests unless forced to do so. The intelligent, barring only a few, will always exploit them to serve their own purposes. They must work to counter this, through use of their own brains. The patterns in politics and history are sometimes difficult to comprehend, especially at first glance. However the more one studies politics, history, or even seek knowledge in general, the easier everything will come to them. There comes a point wherein a person has an awakening of sorts, a point where they finally are able to see how in fact everything, be it in politics, sciences, or anything else, is connected. In order to save themselves, their friends, and their children for generations to come, all must work towards achieving this. Though this higher understanding might escape some, simply aspiring to this will almost certainly be enough to ensure that they understand sufficiently to protect themselves. The line against tyranny and injustice must be drawn, the people must tell the government that they will not be slaves. That they will no longer allow themselves to be blinded, and they will no longer tolerate any actions which would rob them of their freedom.

The revolution must begin, and the outcome of it will determine the future of the entire species. The people must choose their fate, or allow the corrupt to do it for them. The battle against the ruling class's new oppression must begin and alongside it, the greater war against ignorance must be waged. Success in this will herald a new age, wherein justice and equality are not just nice ideas, but reality. The people must dare to dream, and work to realise their vision. ]]> Cattraknoff http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=21 A Lesson Unlearnt http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=19 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:02:26 GMT Humans, as well as even most animals have an incredible ability to learn from their past mistakes. The strongest lessons are those derived from a... Humans, as well as even most animals have an incredible ability to learn from their past mistakes. The strongest lessons are those derived from a situation wherein the person or animal in question is harmed in some way. While these direct lessons are generally grasped by all, there remains another kind which seems to escape the vast majority: Those of history. Most tend to ignore the past, often because of the absolutely useless facts that were shoved down their throats throughout their education careers. As a result they are now unable to forgive this travesty, and pay little heed to what history has to offer. Few are able see how essential it is to understand the past, that they might ensure the same mistakes are not repeated time and again as they have been.

This is where a distinction must be made between two very general groups of people: The ignorant, and the wise. The ignorant, while quite willing and able to learn from obvious mistakes, tend to miss those which require forethought or higher logic. It's quite obvious indeed after they've been stung, so to speak, that they should not repeat those actions which caused it. However this is generally the extent of the lessons they will seek to learn. Only those that apply to the here-and-now, and only those with obviously beneficial application, be it a lack of pain or a gain of some material object. It should not surprise most to learn that the majority of people fall into this category. It's not about them being inferior, or in some other way incapable of higher thought (for the most part), but simply because they are apparently quite comfortable as such, and so that is how they shall remain, barring some drastic influence which would cause them to change mindsets. To their minds they have done well enough as they are, and indeed they are often right. It's often quite thrilling to live in the moment, without looking to the past or future more than is absolutely necessary. There are of course several problems with this style of thought, and that is essentially the title previously given to them "Ignorance." They blind themselves often to the realities of many situations, often out of optimism and a hope that things will always "work out" for the best. This is indeed a very naive notion, for all the hope it supposedly brings.

Conversely there is the group of people hitherto referred to as "wise." This type of person, in general, will dedicate a large portion of their lives to the pursuit of knowledge. Not simply to absorb the information, but to learn any and all possible lessons therein. Often students of history, as well as the present, their quest for knowledge never ends, their thirst never quenched. There are of course varying degrees of this quality, with even the greatest fools possessing it in the slightest, however here it shall be referred to in the obvious and more prominent sense. The wisest individuals never cease their efforts to learn, and more than simply absorbing information, they will indeed make their own conclusions based on what they know. This is often referred to as "intelligence", and so wisdom goes a step beyond this. Wisdom takes that knowledge and understanding of the given situation, and applies as well the lessons of the past, their own and that of others, along with the conclusions to be had from this. Indeed the quality might often seem unattainable, but even the wisest people were fools at one point in their lives. The single key is in seeking to learn, for the sake of the knowledge and lessons themselves, as well as what is to be gained from them.

Of course becoming wise and remaining so seems a lot of effort, and indeed it is. Thought can never truly end, as there is no end to the examples to be seen and learned from. Always there is more to learn; Once whet, the appetite for knowledge grows with each story read, with each conclusion reached. Prior to this point however, there is often an initial struggle. One may seek to learn, but does not fully understand initially. This is enough to ensure that the vast majority do not aspire to learn as they should, that they accept ignorance and thereafter attempt to justify this ceaselessly. It's far easier to remain as they are, and so why should they bother? Others are perfectly capable of thinking for them, of making the difficult choices; They have always been able to get by, and so the necessity of it is lost to them.

Moreover, the virtue of enlightenment both intellectually and spiritually seems to be lost on the vast majority of the populace. This by necessity forces one to look at the more practical applications of committing themselves to the acquisition of knowledge and the formation of logical thought. Advancement can be had not only academically, but also in chosen careers, in relationships with others, and in personal satisfaction. The benefits are too many to list entirely, and different people will of course profit in different ways.

The rewards to be reaped aside, to fully understand why it is not only prudent but absolutely necessary one must look to the consequences of remaining ignorant. One must look at the lessons of the past, to what the intelligent have always done to the foolish: Enslaved them, exploited them, and even exterminated them. The populace allows itself to be abused by turning a blind eye to the world at large. The reasons for this are numerous, foremost being the seeming-difficulty of action and inconvenience of care or worry. They allow their freedoms and rights to be stripped from them, or if none were had to begin with, they allow things to remain as they are. The people either do not realize the power they hold, or are afraid to exercise it.

Consequently, history has always repeated itself. The weak-willed are exploited and abused as they allow themselves to be. The few profit whilst the many suffer and labor endlessly. The people are often made to fear their social "betters", the power wielded over them. The masses tend to dislike their rulers, to dislike the injustices that plague their societies, but still they do nothing. They allow things to remain, feeling powerless and weak, and so they will drown their sorrows in their favorite TV shows, video games as well as alcohol. Their masters could not ask for better blessings than these. Few things work to their benefit more, for few things have been so successful in blinding the people to the truth.

One might ask what exactly this truth is. The answer is not extraordinarily complicated: The truth is that the people are indeed powerful, each and every one of them, and as a whole even more so. This is what tyrants and even presidents have worked so tirelessly to hide from the populace. They work to make each and every person feel hopelessly insignificant, they teach you that you cannot change things, not truly, and as a result few even attempt to, with those who do are shunned and ridiculed. The truth is that those in power fear the people, they fear the power held by the masses. They are afraid of what might happen if the truth of their actions come to light. They dread the hour when the people are able to look at the lessons of history, and fully comprehend what their "betters" are working toward now: The tyranny and injustice that had always seemed inevitable, but is only made so because of the self-blinded populace.

And so at last a race has begun, as it has many times before. The ruling class seek to secure their position, and are well on their way to doing so. The free flow of information will be ceased, and liberties will vanish in an instant. Laws which were supposed to protect the people will be turned against them, and resistance at this point will become impossible. When this moment comes, all hope for freedom and justice will be gone, humanity's fate sealed. The final strides are being taken, and the people still are not aware of what is going on. The people still do not care enough to see the truth as it is, in its entirety. They cling to their naive optimism without end, and shall be destroyed by it. In this instant the people will indeed be made powerless, a dream, a vision aspired to by countless tyrants throughout history. At this point, their power shall be absolute, and unbreakable.

Even now this point is almost at hand: Few free media sources remain, and those that do shall disappear shortly. The majority of wealth is in the hands of increasingly few, and their ambitions grow with each day past. Even now the United States itself, the most powerful nation on the planet is privately owned. There is a corporation therein which prints every single American dollar in existence, and loans them out to various banking institutes as well as the government. This is a corporation set up by various bankers from Europe and America, and was brought about by intentionally engineering economic crises. They essentially own the entire country, as every dollar is owed back to them, with interest. That interest may only be paid if they lend yet more money, with more interest, thus creating an endless and inescapable cycle of debt in which the entire nation is trapped. Moreover, Canada and Mexico are soon to be included in this, once the North American Union takes shape. Leaders from all three nations have already agreed to it, without parliamentary support but with corporate backing. Power in not only a few nations, but the entire world is being consolidated into the hands of a few. They can and must have only one goal, and it is already nearly achieved. They wish the absolute enslavement of the human race, that they may exploit them to serve their own purposes. If nothing is done, this future will inevitably come to pass; There can be no room for optimism which is frankly blind and foolish at this point. The odds even now are well in their favor: The people still pay little to no attention, and even when they do the information they receive is largely what their masters wish them to have. This would not be as bad as it is if the people actually did indeed judge for themselves, if the people managed to find that bit of wisdom that lay in some dormant place of their minds.

There does yet remain some small hope. The people must come to realize the power they hold, and must be willing to exercise that power. Allowing others to control their fates will inevitably ensure their doom. Their only solution is to retake control of their lives. They must work to ensure that those governing them are actually working in the interests of the people, and not for their own selfish ambitions. No one will do this for them, it falls to each and every individual to choose to do this. If they will not, then they will learn that every choice, even those they refuse to consciously make, has its consequences. The consequences of inaction now are difficult to grasp wholly, but suffice to say any misery which might be felt in the short-term pales in comparison to the utter hopelessness and uselessness of life if they should fail to learn from and act on the lessons of the past. ]]> Cattraknoff http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=19 <![CDATA[A Timeless Dream: Humanity's Vision]]> http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=18 Fri, 28 Mar 2008 03:01:56 GMT In the minds of the people exists a vision, a dream. Undoubtedly since the first people were enslaved, the first dreams of justice took shape. The... In the minds of the people exists a vision, a dream. Undoubtedly since the first people were enslaved, the first dreams of justice took shape. The first thoughts of freedom, of the way things should be. These are dreams which a great many cling to. These ideals were the founding notions for many of the greatest nations to exist in history. From the earliest democracies in Greece, to the Republic of Rome, to the United States today, all these shared this vision.

However this vision by itself was not all they had in common. Each of these nations, though its people undoubtedly strongly believed in these ideals, had a ruling class which worked to undermine everything their laws were designed to protect. The Greek democracies were often conquered, and even when they weren't the lower classes had little say in the way things were run. It was a great idea then, and remains so, but the people were not ready to make it work. The failure of the Greeks' attempt was inevitable, but it was a beginning; it was among the first small hopes humanity was given.

Next came Rome, one of the greatest empires the world has ever seen. It was however, as is important to note, not an empire at its founding. It was a republic, based on this very dream. Since the Roman people overthrew their King around ~600 BC, they operated as a Republic, intended to promote freedom, equality, and justice. However the remnants of the ruling nobility (Or Patrician class, as they called them) retained a stranglehold on power in the city. They were the first to corrupt politics, as they believed it was their right to have power. They drove out the Kings after all, they were among the educated few, and they were the largest source of military commanders. All this supposedly gave them the right to undermine their democracy, all this gave them the right to work for their own interests first and foremost, because they were the betters of all, as they would tell it.

The Roman republic died in its entirety with the arrival of Augustus Caesar, and Julius Caesar before him. However even before Rome was made an empire in name, democracy was long since dead. Power was monopolized, the lives of the plebs (lower classes) were not given much thought. The will of the people was ignored, because there was little incentive to listen. Though the dream that was Rome lives on still, this attempt at implementing it was again a failure.

Finally comes the American dream, the modern vision which most democracies today are based upon. Though the dream itself came from Rome, and Greece, this latest implementation had proven to be successful, for a time. Indeed, the old nobilities were cast out, and though the American republic is largely based upon the Roman one, many of the flaws that destroyed Rome were not present. The people of the west as a result of America's rise to power had been given a chance at finally seeing justice. They were given hope for a better future, one full of promise, one wherein people might indeed be equals, at least in their basic rights.

However this hope has now been crushed; though the people have not yet realized it. The ruling classes of old have reemerged with a vengeance, with more power than ever before. The absolute monopolization of wealth that occurred as a result of rampant and unchecked capitalism has annihilated all chance of making the dream a reality. Indeed, nobles have returned in the form of corporate leaders. They influence the government using their wealth, they bribe prominent party officials, or entire political parties. They have gained an iron grip on most media outlets now, controlling the spread of most information. As each new form of delivering news and information was made available, they worked to take control of each. Not a monopoly mind you, but a few corporations to give the illusion that it was still free and fair. Today as it stands 97% of television channels are owned by three American corporations. Radio broadcasting is only allowed with special permit, whereas in the past there were countless independent radio broadcasters, people were able to be heard. Newspapers initially cost ~$10000 American to begin producing, but corporations gaining control moved that figure well into the millions, effectively taking the average person out of the equation altogether. The sole voice the people have today is granted by the Internet. Here and only here information can be shared almost without restriction, here the people, big or small, rich or poor, can be heard. However this is going to change. Corporations have a mind to turn the Internet into TVs, into radios and newspapers. They wish to control the flow of information, and are well on their way to implementing this. Many people would and do oppose this, but the simple fact is that as long as all these multi-billion dollar corporations wish to do it (not to mention that it certainly helps the government in controlling the people), it will be brought into effect. Whether justified as a way to cut off terrorists, hackers, or simply to ward off all those “evil” people interfering with their God-given right to profit through absolutely no work of their own.

The death of the free Internet will be the last nail in the coffin of modern democracy. Even without this democracy would die, but eliminating free flow of information makes the process infinitely simpler to the powers that be. The people are easy to manipulate, easy to mislead. Public opinion can be swayed with a few crafty and oh-so-clever words. Major news outlets are certainly being used to do this now. Indeed, nearly every news article (those about anything of importance, at any rate) are made in hopes that you will come to the opinion that the government wishes you to have. Not on an individual basis mind you, but after reading countless news articles, or watching many TV news programs, they have an overall idea that they wish you to get from it. They wish you to believe that terrorists are likely to kill you if you don't follow them blindly. They also, believe it or not, would like you to believe that oil was indeed the real “secret” reason why Iraq and Afghanistan were invaded.

They would have you abandon your common sense and logical thought. They would have you believe the utter farce that is multiculturalism. They wish you to be afraid of Islam, but at the same time you must tolerate them. You must be accepting of the fact that they're allowed to beat and/or kill their (multiple) wives for disobedience. You must accept that they're told to deceive, harm and kill you if you won't become a Muslim. You must accept that they will oppress and kill you if given the chance. Not the average Muslim, mind you. But their holy book indeed states that they should do this, and their extreme and power-hungry leaders promote these parts of the Qu'Ran above all else.

They also want you to believe that it is perfectly okay to have a lawsuit for practically anything, even when it's your own fault. They want you to care solely about your own advancement, your own wealth, without regard to the effects it has. They want you to know that you don't have to be responsible for your own stupidity, not really. In fact, in the modern world, stupidity is prized above nearly any other quality. It's an odd society that rewards idiocy and a lack of common sense, but nonetheless that is what ours has become. The death of logical thought is not overly recent. In fact, logical thought has never been taken up in earnest by the masses of any society in history. The effects of which speak for themselves. The invitation of tyranny in most societies, the suppression of rational thought and morals in “God's” name, and the utter failures of democracy each and every time the implementation of it has been attempted. The people have not been ready for democracy, they have not been ready for freedom itself. The people have neglected their brains, forsaken thought itself, because it's made to seem the easier path. And what would western societies be without the incredible laziness they're famous for?

If only the people would learn from their mistakes. If only they would look objectively and seriously at the lessons of history. Democracy has failed not because it can't work, not because of an overly-idealistic nature (as is present in communism), but because the people have not cared enough to make it work. The people have chosen the path of laziness, they've chosen the easy route, because rational and logical thought is apparently so hopelessly difficult. The simple fact is this: It is quite easy, and you become better at it the more you use your brain. The way to become intelligent is to think, freely and without prejudice. The way to become a fool is to let yourself be brainwashed twelve hours a day by all of the grand mass-media outlets, drugs, celebrity worship and countless other banes to your intellect. Indeed, watching TV in itself is not a problem, nor is even a bit of recreational drug use (alcohol is a drug as well, mind you). The trouble is when these are used to the point wherein you scarcely use your own brain. You're seldom grounded in reality, and when you are your thoughts are always crippled the prejudices which have been drilled into your brain since infancy. You must always remember all the things which restrict your thought, all the things which rob you of your wits.

Humanity has two options, and only one path may be followed by the entire populace (disregarding the ruling class). It's either-or, with no middle-ground to be had. Firstly they can go on as they are, partying, watching their sitcoms and soap operas, giving little thought to the world around them. Conversely they might decide to better themselves; to develop mentally, physically and spiritually. They might decide that they are no longer content having their decisions made for them. They might wish to truly be free, in every sense of the word. They might indeed choose to take control of their own fates, to shape their destinies as they see fit.

The outcomes of each option are quite simple: If the former, they shall earn and accept their slavery. They will deserve this fate, as it is their own choice and it is well within their power to change. If the latter, then they, humanity will have something it has never had: Freedom, true equality in law as well as its application; the realization of an ancient dream. Humanity will be at last as it should have been, as it should become, and as it must remain, for justice, and for our survival if nothing else. ]]> Cattraknoff http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=18 North American Union http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=15 Mon, 10 Mar 2008 02:59:10 GMT Rumor has it that Harper, Bush and Calderon were in Mexico over the weekend working on a plan to make us all one country.

Personally I couldn't think of anything worse for Canada.

Has anyone else heard this rumor? ]]> Media Magnate http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=15 <![CDATA[Humanity's Future: A Question For Us All]]> http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=14 Sun, 09 Mar 2008 04:05:28 GMT "Blinding yourself to a harsh truth will not render it false; it simply ensures your ruin by its hand. However if you follow the truth, wherever it may take you, you thereby empower yourself to shape it, to shape the very world."


There is a question that we must all ask ourselves in the near future: What is more important to us: Fun, enjoyment, contentment in the short-term, or our very futures? Not only our own futures, but those of our children; the future of humanity as a whole. Are we willing to ignore the injustices plaguing our world? Are we willing to turn a blind eye to all that degrades humanity as a whole, simply because we can live relatively comfortably here and now?

Many would and do say that there is nothing to worry about. Many say that things aren't so bad. Our lives here in the western world are pretty good, are they not? We don't have to worry about being invaded by another country. We don't have to worry about bombs going off, being shot in the street (except in some neighborhoods, granted), starving to death, or being struck down by some plague. No, we can live quite safely, can we not? We have nothing to worry about, nothing of consequence, right? It's great to live far away from terrible places such as Africa, most of Asia, South America, etc. All the benefits of living where we do allow us to ignore problems in these areas. The need to change these things, the need to improve humanity is a nice little thought, that few truly cares about enough to do anything of consequence.

But of course it will all be solved once they adopt our great democratic system, will it not? All that needs to be done is to turn them into the west, correct? If we bring them our capitalism and abundant freedom, surely all shall be put right. Of course that's ignoring the fact that our own freedoms are being steadily degraded, but what matter is that? Capitalism allows for the monopolization of wealth, it allows for a very small group of people to reap the rewards of others' hard work. This alone degrades freedoms, but this alone is far from even scratching the surface of what should worry us all.

Some might think the war in Iraq and Afghanistan are great problems for us. Ah yes, to be trapped in a war that cannot be won, because we fight an idea, rather than a nation. Regardless of whether the idea is right or wrong, it does have power. The war was never meant to be won outright, however. If it was, then you should be worried about the idiots you have running your country. They either did not think ahead, to after the initial attack, or had other purposes than their stated intentions (spreading democracy, freedom, ensuring peace, etc.). The obvious intention most will cite: Oil. Obviously the US Government wouldn't state this outright, but it surely did offer them some encouragement. That being said, the oil does little to benefit the United States, especially in the short term. The massive fallout in international and public relations, incredible drain on the US economy, as well as the surge in oil-prices largely caused by the “war on terror” should make the gain in oil an after-thought. Their nation has been battered by the war, weakened significantly as a result of their own seemingly-foolish actions. They unquestionably knew this would happen, and so the question that remains: Why then did they attack Iraq at all? Their nation has not benefited from it, and it surely wasn't to help the Iraqi people. The United States has installed more ruthless dictators throughout history than any other nation in recent (200 years) history. They might even hold an all-time record.

The answer is not incredibly complicated. One must only look to what Iraq, and more importantly, the “War on Terror” as a whole has been used to accomplish on the home front. It isn't even primarily about benefiting the war-production corporations, nor the oil companies. No, it is a political ploy. Since the start of the war on terror, the powers of the US government over the people has been increased substantially. In the name of “security” against the so-called terrorists, the people are stripped of their democratic and human rights. The cases are quite numerous: You have the wire-tapping which violates privacy rights, as well as the government's ability to arrest, detain indefinitely, torture and/or kill anyone they wish without warrant or trial, simply because they suspect they might be a terrorist. They require no proof of any kind to carry this out. This is a grievous violation of the American constitution. It is against basic human rights, which the US are supposed to be promoting in Iraq. It is against everything the United States supposedly stands for. This alone is equivalent to the introduction of fascism in the United States. These measures empower the US government to turn the country into a police state on a whim. Of course it isn't one yet, not entirely and certainly not obviously. But the simple fact is that as soon as exceptions to constitutional rights are allowed, as soon as the government is given such power over the people it controls, it can and will be abused. There is absolutely no reason to even bring about such measures unless the government in question intends to abuse it, or is opening the door for future administrations to do so.

The simple fact is that our rights, the rights of all people in the west and the world are being degraded. It is not obvious as of yet in most areas, as it is not intended to be. For now there shall be small steps, with no obvious change at each interval. It is a gradual process of expanding the control of the already-powerful. It is a process which is being used to slowly, steadily grind away at the ability and even desire of the people to resist tyranny. If and when this does become obvious to the general public, it will be far too late to act. There will come a time when an equivalent to a police state is brought about in its entirety. Even then the people may be so blinded as not to notice. The government, and corporations, largely through the media have worked together to pacify us, the people. They have worked to blind us to the truth, they have made us not even want to know it.

Know that it is absolutely inevitable that we should lose our freedom, that we shall become slaves in every sense of the word, our lives worth nothing. We shall become not but property if we do not act. An ignorant, self-blinded and uncaring populace will always become such. There are far too numerous examples throughout history that might be cited: Ancient Rome, Nazi Germany, all the various monarchies throughout Europe and Asia, the Islamic regimes in many nations today... the list goes on. In fact, there has been no country with any amount of power ever to have existed in which the people even knew how to resist the corruptions which have always plagued nations, and as such they were exploited and abused by the ruling class. The only reason for this is indeed the fact that the people do not seem to care enough to do anything. They do not care so long as they can live in relative peace and safety, or with the illusion of it.

If the people do nothing, we will go down the same path as all those nations before us. The nature of mankind has not changed with our newfound technology and “knowledge”; the ability to resist it is even deteriorated by it. Soon enough a dictatorship will come, and this one will be absolute. The people will be powerless to resist, the chance of a revolution nonexistent. There will be no new age of freedom to follow. The world will fall to a permanent darkness, and only a few, only our masters, will benefit from it.

So again I would pose a question: What is more important: Your “comfort” now, or your future? Would you choose freedom or slavery, justice or tyranny? The choice is yours to make, for the time being. Choose quickly though, else it be made for you; time is running short, and we are accelerating down the path of foolishness. Humanity as a whole must make the choice. The wrong one will cost everything; the wrong choice will destroy us in the end. ]]> Cattraknoff http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=14 Several GOP politics, and help shape the rules Md. Va. Contests http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=12 Wed, 13 Feb 2008 06:20:56 GMT Mike Huckabee at least made a contest In Virginia of the John McCain, the Republicans' presumptive nominee, while across the Potomac River in Maryland, was also-ran.

The fate of the divergent Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas and Baptist minister, spoke about the differences between DPS and the policies of both states and by Senator of Arizona rocky history in Virginia. Also, were partly due to different rules governing the two competitions, analysts said.

McCain was leading Huckabee, from 50.3 to 40.4 percent percent, with almost all its buildings reference in Virginia. In Maryland, exit polls suggested that the margin could be two or three times higher.

Shown in Little Rock last night, said Huckabee of relatively strong showing in Virginia to argue that the party base is rallying around him, saying that he supported his decision to continue the match and despite McCain almost insurmountable lead in delegates.

"It shows there is still a real sense in the Republican Party, a desire to have a choice, a desire to make sure that voters who want a strong conservative, very much in favour of life candidate still exist," said Huckabee, who claimed that the campaign was headed for a few "intense weeks" ahead.

In Virginia, Huckabee ran stronger in rural western Virginia, the state of the Bible Belt.

Exit polls showed that 46 percent of Virginia voters identified themselves as evangelicals, and voted for McCain over Huckabee: 60 percent to 31 percent.

In Maryland, a lower percentage of self-identified evangelicals, 35 percent, participated in the primary. And among those who did vote, Huckabee were not as prevalent. In Maryland, Huckabee led among evangelicals, 52 percent to 35 percent.

"There is no comparable basis in the evangelical Maryland," said Allan J. Lichtman, a presidential historian at American University.

Huckabee was also dominates in Virginia among self-described conservatives, resulting in 51 percent to 38 percent, according to exit polls.

In Maryland, McCain drew a larger percentage of the self-conservatives than that described Huckabee, 43 percent to 36 percent.

"The Virginia Republican Party is much more conservative than even the conservative wing of the Maryland Republican Party," said Donald F. Norris, chairman of the Department of Public Policy at the University of Maryland Baltimore County.

Huckabee supporters of Maryland also pointed to larger rural swaths in Virginia.

"The rural population is also significantly larger than Maryland in Virginia, and Governor Huckabee has the ability to connect to these areas," said Del. Christopher B. Shank (R-Washington), the minority whip in the Maryland House of Delegates or a supporter Huckabee leads in the state.

Vythise was among only a handful of elected officials in Maryland Huckabee, who supported the bid. The state's most prominent Republican, the former governor Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. (R), and other members of the party establishment rallied around McCain in the final days of the race.

In Virginia, even some of McCain's supporters saw a mixed message in his victory.

"John McCain has some work to do to demonstrate the soundness of certain conservative," said Virginia Attorney-General Robert F. McDonnell, a conservative, which was thrown behind the support of McCain as recently as last week. "John McCain is excellent for spending on defence, to get a budget under control and the fight against terrorists. However, the campaign for immigration funding or energy policy or some of the traditional values issues, its got some work to do . "

McCain has had a difficult relationship with conservatives, and Virginia has a special place in that history.

His advocacy of granting illegal immigrants a path to citizenship, and its refusal to return a national ban on marriage between same-sex and the support of the campaign financing restrictions caused small government, the social-values conservatives to bristle.

During a campaign swing through Virginia, in 2000, for example, the candidate sealed the fate of conservative voters by inviting the two of the most visible of the situation of religious leaders, Mr. Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, "agents of intolerance." George Bush won the state primary.

McCain has made peace with key leaders on the conservative Virginia, including Falwell before he died last year. But Huckabee was expected by many to fare well with an estimated one-third of Virginia adults who call themselves Evangelical Protestants.

Mark Vayda, 82, who voted yesterday Huckabee at Park View High school and Sterling. McCain, said: "I have no confidence at all humankind. I believe in sealing the border. Rad Spanish people, but I am against all forms of illegal immigration."

Party rules also helped to explain yesterday's results, analysts said.

In Virginia, independents were allowed to vote in the Republican and Democratic primaries. Dothei a most exciting contest on the Democratic side, many of these independent operators probably participated in a competition. Where left a more conservative tank voters who participate in the Republican primary, said Thomas F. Schaller, a professor of political science at the University of Maryland Baltimore County.

In Maryland, only Republicans were allowed to vote in the party contest.

And struggling probably mattered, too. Huckabee put in an appearance in Maryland in the last days of the race. It was a more familiar presence in Virginia, where television ads with greater frequency.

Disclaimer:
Quote:
This blog post is a rewrite of News from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...021203438.html

By John Wagner and Perry Bacon Jr.
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, February 13, 2008.

This post rewrite by moinuddin102.
]]> moinuddin102 http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=12 20 Million Single Women Missing In Action http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=11 Sun, 27 Jan 2008 22:08:19 GMT 20 MILLION SINGLE WOMEN MISSING IN ACTION In 2004, 20 Million Single Women Did Not Vote From The Desk Of www.20millionvotes.com and... 20 MILLION SINGLE WOMEN MISSING IN ACTION


In 2004, 20 Million Single Women Did Not Vote


From The Desk Of www.20millionvotes.com and www.askthepresident.tv


Log On Ladies, Register To Vote, Chat with Women Across The USA about what matters to you and Upload Your Questions For The Candidates. Women face disparities in all walks of life, if we want change we must come together for change. Let us work together to let the candidates know our voices will be heard in the 2008 Elections.


Red White And Pink Movement


www.askthepresident.tv

“(U)nmarried women may play the same role for Democrats in 2008 that white evangelicals played for George Bush and the Republicans in 2004,”

Here’s to all the single women out there

By MARY SANCHEZ


Step aside soccer moms, NASCAR dads.


A new sought-after voting bloc is emerging in American politics: People like me — unmarried women voters.


Pollsters have recently discovered that this country has more than 53 million unmarried women of voting age. That’s more than a quarter of the electorate, encompassing more potential voters than many of the usual highly sought after groups, including seniors, racial minorities and union members.

“(U)nmarried women may play the same role for Democrats in 2008 that white evangelicals played for George Bush and the Republicans in 2004,” said a study by Greenberg, Quinlan, Rosner Research. More than 20 million unmarried women did not vote in 2004. Capture their votes and take the oath of office, or so goes the theory.


Thanks for noticing, fellas.


But let’s slow down before putting on these women’s foreheads a label that couldn’t possibly capture the wide range among unmarried women voters. A young woman just out of high school, a career woman new to her profession, a divorced 40-something, a widow in her 80s — all could fit.

Some headline writers and pundits were quick to label this group the “Sex and the City” voters. Nice TV show, but the “Sex and the City” girls curiously never seem to work, yet are able to splurge on shopping daily and eating out nightly in New York City — and never seem to gain an ounce of weight. Not reality.


The “single, anxious female” is how a senior strategist for Hillary Clinton’s campaign terms unmarried women, noting their angst about money. She is right on; two incomes often do make life easier.


Money, or strains about it, is the taboo subject between many a married woman and her unmarried girlfriend. Mrs. Married often will complain about bills, the mortgage, car trouble and so forth, and her unmarried friend will nod and grit her teeth, knowing she is burdened with the same things, but with the resources of only one salary.


But don’t point this out too explicitly, candidates. Women, to their detriment, do not like to admit money woes. So a candidate who speaks to single women as distress cases is likely to chase away their votes, not court them. Convince a single woman that you could possibly do something about her financial situation and you might get a vote, but you’d have to break down some of society’s myths about marriage along the way.


The institution of marriage has changed significantly over the past 30 years. A majority of women are now unmarried. Most people, 90 percent, marry at some point in their lives, but they are spending more of their lives single. And they live longer — especially women, who are more likely to outlive spouses and wind up in the unmarried category as widows. And, yes, people cohabitate, often forming lifelong bonds, minus the religious or civil ceremony.


Yet laws and policies often presume that marriage is the default condition in life. And that can make life more difficult for the single. Imagine the allure of a candidate who would candidly speak to tax disparities among married and single people, or to the situation of singles who don’t have the option of health-care coverage through a spouse, or to the way education in America is structured around the assumption of two-parent families, with one available at home.


Most women of voting age were raised with a few pixie dust-laden ideas that a magical kiss would produce Prince Charming, complete with a nice house and a bulging 401K. But we unmarried women are much less likely to view marriage as a solution to our problems — especially as we have watched our married counterparts (or possibly ourselves) sink financially after a divorce.


Unmarried women, experts say, are far more likely to believe they need a network of support systems — family, friends, employers, private agencies and, yes, government — for their worlds to run efficiently. Hillary Clinton got this part right when she touted the African proverb, “It takes a village.…”


The Greenberg study found that 78 percent of unmarried women believe the country is on the wrong track. That is a lot of skepticism for candidates to mine. The study also suggests that unmarried women, in a departure from the past, are now more interested in voting than married women.

As anyone can attest who has ever watched a bargain-seeking woman plow through a sale rack, women will go to great lengths if they know the effort will bring value to their lives. Candidates who convince women their platforms are worth the effort just might earn a valuable token of an unmarried woman’s love: her vote.


Log On Ladies to www.20millionvotes.com or www.askthepresident.tv


Register To Vote, Chat with Women Across The USA about what matters to you and Upload Your Questions For The Candidates. Women face disparities in all walks of life, if we want change we must come together for change. Let us work together to let the candidates know our voices will be heard in the 2008 Elections.


Red White And Pink Movement


www.askthepresident.tv

www.20millionvotes.com ]]> askthepresident http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=11 <![CDATA[So much for Bush's Peace Talks]]> http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=10 Mon, 21 Jan 2008 20:46:02 GMT Just a few days after President Bush visits Israel and Palestine, they are back at it. Israel created a blockade of Gaza which left Gaza without the... Just a few days after President Bush visits Israel and Palestine, they are back at it. Israel created a blockade of Gaza which left Gaza without the fuel to electrify their country. After aid agencies of a humanitarian crisis complained, Israel agreed to relax the blockage. Israel Defense Ministry stated that they will allow one shipment of fuel and medicine into Gaza on Tuesday. Israel Defense Ministry stated that the blockade was due to continuous rocket attacks on Israel.


The blockade stopped food, fuel, medicine from making it to Gaza, leaving hospitals without electricity and heat. Most people would think that Israel would treat people better, specially since they have so much experience when it comes to inhuman treatment. At least someone in Israel has a sense of humanity, An Israel-based human rights group pressured the Israeli Government to easy the blockade because it was effecting hospitals, schools, and water supply in Gaza. Poor President Bush, his trip was a waste of time. ]]> ShadyPolitics http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=10 Deus Vult!: A Short Story by Catt http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=8 Wed, 16 Jan 2008 03:39:24 GMT Deus Vult!

..."Deus Vult," he said to me. God wills that I be tortured. God wills that my family be executed with me. God wishes for me to be punished for the sins which I have committed. God wills that I write my final thoughts, he said. God wants me to repent, to beg forgiveness for my heretical ways.

But what heresy, what sins have I committed? To speak against wars which would take the lives of women, children, as much as they would men. "They are heretics!" they tell me. They deserve to die because their beliefs are not that of our own. To speak against the pillaging of cities, the rape of women, slaughter of many, innocents all.

Long did I believe them, did I actually carry out God's vaunted will. Men, whether armed or not, women, and even children did I put to the sword, did I instruct my men to put to death. Their screams echo still within my skull, the screams of terror as they fled, the shrieks of agony as blades pierced their flesh. "Deus Vult!" was our cry, God wills it. God wished those who survived to be purified by torture as well, I imagine. As if it were not enough to simply kill them, they had to be made to see the light; by lash, fire, and worse would they see. Entire towns and cities have been exterminated, all because they were raised to believe in another God. "It is for their salvation!" our priests cry; It is to teach them our God's love.

But what God who loved all so could wish this? How could he command the slaughter of so many? How could the same God, in all his glory, with his supposedly perfect nature, wish the death of so many people, simply because they had not been taught to believe in him as we do? If he is so forgiving, if he is just, how could he allow such acts in his name? There is no mercy in this; it is barbaric beyond anything even conceived of by the "heretics."

They told me that our savagery was the path to heaven, that I would be granted my place in paradise for "showing them the grace of god." Countless have I and others murdered, by their will. Why is it that God's commandments lose any meaning when it is against anyone different than us? We have killed, stolen, sinned in every way possible, yet it is somehow excusable against them. I cannot believe that our "perfect" God would wish us to be hypocritical, flawed as such. I refuse to believe that he commanded this.

And now, after dedicating my life to his service, I am to be burned at a stake. They tried to force a confession out of me, to force me to repent, promising mercy, of all things. I would take death gladly now, after what I have seen. I will accept my eternal punishment, if that is what awaits me. No longer will I betray my conscience, no longer will I kill, lie, or steal, in the name of an unjust god; Or perhaps just an unjust man's interpretation of him. I may accept that I am wrong if it is proven so in death, but until then, my conscience, my own morals, shall not be ignored at the behest of another man. God can tell me so if he wishes, where no man shall be heard over my own will.

My family awaits me in hell, they say. I cannot believe this, for they have not sinned. Their only "wrong" was to know and love a man such as I, to follow me. They were taken from me, from this world, not because they were evil, but because a few petty men could not stomach being questioned. So impossible for them to handle is this that they will make a mockery of all their vaunted moral virtues, if only to silence it. They cannot handle truth, whilst their faith is supposed to be based on such.

Everything they could take, they took from me. My family, my titles, my land, my wealth, and my men. They took flesh as well, in attempt to sap my will. But what they have not taken, what they cannot take, is truth, is God as I know him to be. I am certain that they are wrong in their "knowledge" of him, and that is my sole comfort. Either God did not command us to kill as we have, or he is not just, and thus imperfect, flawed, in consequence. Their teachings cannot be wholly true, so they cannot be from God, for God is and must be perfect. I do know something of right and wrong, and I know that to kill innocents is wrong, whatever their faith.

And so at last my death shall come. The pain shall give way to truth, and I will accept what comes as I must; Because... Deus Vult. ]]> Cattraknoff http://www.politicsonfire.com/blog.php?b=8